Selective Laser Melting Patent Landscape 2026
Selective Laser Melting Patent Landscape in 2026
Selective laser melting is a maturing, heavily concentrated field: General Electric alone accounts for the largest single share among the top hundred filers, and the top five together hold 25% of that group’s combined output. Annual filing volume peaked in 2018 and has eased since, signalling that the core process layer is consolidating while application-specific branches — notably alloy development and process control — remain comparatively open.
General Electric leads a concentrated but multi-tier field
General Electric holds the top position with 1,228 patent families, well ahead of second-ranked Renishaw PLC at 387 and third-ranked Siemens Energy Global GmbH & Co KG at 366, establishing a clear lead tier that is roughly three times larger than the nearest challenger.
The top five filers — General Electric, Renishaw, Siemens Energy Global, Align Technology, and Peridot Print — together account for 25% of the hundred largest filers’ combined total, indicating meaningful but not monopolistic concentration; a substantial second tier from rank six onward remains competitively active.
| # | Applicant | Patent families | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | General Electric Company | 1,228 | |
| 2 | Renishaw PLC | 387 | |
| 3 | SIEMENS ENERGY GLOBAL GMBH & CO KG | 366 | |
| 4 | Align Technology Inc | 352 | |
| 5 | Peridot Print LLC | 297 | |
| 6 | Divergent Technologies Inc | 290 | |
| 7 | Siemens AG | 281 | |
| 8 | Applied Materials Inc | 278 | |
| 9 | Velo3D Inc | 256 | |
| 10 | Hewlett Packard Development Company LP | 250 |
| # | Applicant | Patent families | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11 | The Boeing Company | 233 | |
| 12 | Nikon SLM Solutions AG | 226 | |
| 13 | GE Infrastructure Technology LLC | 188 | |
| 14 | RTX Corporation | 185 | |
| 15 | Constellium Technology Center (C-TEC) | 171 | |
| 16 | South China University of Technology | 166 | |
| 17 | MTU Aero Engines GmbH | 159 | |
| 18 | HUAZHONG UNIV OF SCI & TECH | 156 | |
| 19 | General Electric Technology GmbH | 153 | |
| 20 | Proterial Ltd | 148 |
General Electric’s position, reinforced by its GE Infrastructure Tech and General Electric Tech subsidiaries also appearing in the top twenty, suggests a coordinated portfolio strategy spanning process equipment, materials, and end-use components — raising the barrier for new entrants targeting core SLM process patents specifically.
Filings from approximately 2023 onward are subject to publication lag and will increase as pending applications publish; apparent recent-year counts should not be read as the final activity level. Longer-window growth, applicant concentration, and technology-route coverage are therefore more reliable signals than the latest-year bar alone.
A 2018 peak, a broadening application mix, and sparse process-control coverage
The annual filing trend reveals a field that crested in 2018 and has contracted on a multi-year basis, while the IPC composition shows that activity has spread well beyond core additive manufacturing classes into alloys, medical devices, dental, and aerospace sub-domains.
Annual filing trend
Annual families reached a peak of 2,595 in 2018 before declining through 2022–2024; figures for 2024–2026 are substantially under-counted due to publication lag and should not be interpreted as the true recent pace. The multi-year contraction from the 2018 peak is nevertheless real and reflects consolidation of core process IP.
↗ Hover for values · click a bar to ask EurekaTechnology composition
B33Y (additive manufacturing) and B22F (powder metallurgy) dominate the branch mix, confirming that most activity addresses core process and powder-handling claims. Adjacent branches — B23K (welding and brazing), C22C (alloys), and G05B (control systems) — carry meaningfully lower shares, flagging under-served intersections between SLM and materials science or process automation.
↗ Hover for values · click a bar to ask EurekaHighly cited patent families surfaced by the query
Citation-heavy patent families returned by the query. Use this section as citation context, not as a curated list of the most topic-specific patents.
A nozzle containing at least one static mixing ele…
The invention relates to a nozzle containing at least one static mixing element, wherein the nozzle and the at least one static mixing element are produced as a single- component object by a selective laser melting (SLM) process. The invention further relates to a process for producing a three-dimensional green body by a fused filament 0fabrication process… (excerpt from the patent abstract)
| # | Patent | Citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Method and apparatus for 3D printing by selective … | 508 |
| 2 | Procedure and apparatus for in-situ monitoring and… | 433 |
| 3 | Direct fabrication of orthodontic appliances with … | 355 |
| 4 | Method of using a powered stapling device | 337 |
| 5 | Implant device and method for manufacture | 336 |
| 6 | Patient-specific medical procedures and devices, a… | 310 |
| 7 | Powder dispensing apparatus and method | 301 |
| 8 | Apparatuses, systems and methods for three-dimensi… | 266 |
Ranked by total forward citations. Citation counts favour older and broadly cited patent families, and broad or adjacent patents may appear when they match the search scope. Treat this section as citation context, not as a curated list of the most topic-specific patents. Some patent titles may be shown in their original, non-English language where an accurate translation could not be guaranteed.
What the competitive structure means for R&D investment
Four structural observations — maturity, concentration, collaboration patterns, and geographic reach — together define where new entrants face the highest barriers and where targeted investment may still find room.
Post-peak consolidation phase
The lifecycle stage is Decline: annual filing volume has eased back from the 2018 peak, with the multi-year window showing a 32% contraction. Core process claims are densely occupied, so incremental process patents face high prior-art density. R&D differentiation is more viable in application-specific sub-domains — dental, orthopaedic implants, heat exchangers — where filing intensity is lower.
Post-peakThree-to-one lead-tier gap, active second tier
General Electric at 1,228 patent families is roughly three times larger than Renishaw at 387 and Siemens Energy Global at 366. Despite this gap, ranks six through twenty are closely bunched — Divergent Technologies, Siemens AG, Applied Materials, Velo3D, and Hewlett Packard Development are each within a 40-family range — meaning the second tier remains genuinely competitive and accessible to well-resourced new entrants.
High concentrationGE–Concept Laser axis dominates co-filing; HP–academic links notable
The most active co-filing pair is General Electric and Concept Laser with 50 jointly filed families, consistent with GE’s acquisition of Concept Laser. Hewlett Packard Development co-filed 16 families with Atlantic Research Institute and 9 with Nanyang Technological University, signalling an active academic engagement strategy. Align Technology and Cubicure co-filed 6 families, reflecting a materials-plus-application collaboration in dental.
Acquisition-ledUS-dominant, China rising, Europe well-represented
The United States leads jurisdictional coverage, followed by China and Europe (EPO). Germany and Japan are the next largest individual national offices. WIPO (PCT) filings indicate that the leading applicants are actively seeking multi-jurisdiction protection. China’s position as the second-largest jurisdiction signals growing domestic competitive pressure from Chinese filers such as South China University of Technology and Huazhong University of Science and Technology.
US-led, China growingGo beyond the landscape: Eureka’s TRIZ Solution agent breaks down an R&D problem and returns patented concept solutions, each with a technical approach and cited patent & literature evidence.
| Applicant | Collaborator | Co-filings |
|---|---|---|
| General Electric Company | Concept Laser GmbH | 50 |
| Hewlett Packard Development Company LP | Atlantic Research Institute | 16 |
| Concept Laser GmbH | GE ADDITIVE GERMANY GMBH | 11 |
| Hewlett Packard Development Company LP | Nanyang Technological University | 9 |
| Concept Laser GmbH | KU Leuven (Catholic University of Leuven) | 6 |
| Align Technology Inc | Cubicure GmbH | 6 |
| General Electric Company | Carpenter Technology Corporation | 5 |
| General Electric Company | Oerlikon Management AG | 4 |
| Siemens AG | Siemens Industry Software GmbH | 4 |
| Siemens AG | Siemens (China) Co Ltd | 4 |
Co-filing pairs, ranked by the number of jointly-filed patent families.
General Electric and Align Technology: divergent trajectories at the top
Among the highest-volume filers, momentum has split sharply: incumbents with core process portfolios have contracted while application-focused challengers have accelerated, most notably in dental and structural components.
General Electric Co
General Electric leads with 1,228 patent families, concentrated in additive manufacturing process (B33Y10, B33Y30) and plastics shaping (B29C64) — reflecting broad process and equipment coverage. Momentum has contracted sharply (▼ –59% recent versus prior three-year period), consistent with a maturing core portfolio. GE’s affiliated entities GE Infrastructure Tech and General Electric Tech GmbH add further depth to its overall position.
patent families: 1,228Align Technology Inc
Align Technology ranks fourth overall with 352 patent families and is the fastest-growing major incumbent, with recent filings up ▲ +112% versus the prior three-year period. Its technology focus is tightly application-specific: dental and oral hygiene (A61C7) and additive manufacturing end-products (B33Y80), supported by a co-filing relationship with Cubicure. This trajectory suggests deliberate vertical positioning in dental additive manufacturing rather than broad process coverage.
patent families: 352| Applicant | Recent (3 yrs) | Trend |
|---|---|---|
| General Electric Company | 170 | ▼ -59% |
| Hewlett Packard Development Company LP | 23 | ▼ -89% |
| Siemens AG | 15 | ▼ -85% |
| Concept Laser GmbH | 58 | ▼ -65% |
| Renishaw PLC | 48 | ▼ -55% |
| Align Technology Inc | 178 | ▲ +112% |
| Divergent Technologies Inc | 95 | ▲ +22% |
| Velo3D Inc | 74 | ▲ +164% |
Under-served branches adjacent to core SLM activity
Five IPC branches appear as lower-share zones relative to the dominant B33Y and B22F classes; among these, welding/brazing process integration, alloy development, and closed-loop process control stand out as technically adjacent to SLM with plausible entry paths.
C22C · Alloys — SLM-optimised material compositions
C22C carries a comparatively low share of the corpus despite alloy selection being critical to SLM part quality. Most alloy-related claims appear as supporting claims within broader additive manufacturing families rather than as primary alloy-composition patents. An entrant with deep metallurgical capability could stake primary claims on SLM-specific alloy compositions — particularly for high-entropy alloys, nickel superalloys, and titanium variants — where the intersection with laser processing parameters is still sparsely claimed. Academic filers such as Huazhong University of Science and Technology and South China University of Technology are active in this space but leave room for industrial-grade composition patents.
Search this in Eureka →G05B · Control and regulating systems — in-process monitoring and closed-loop control
G05B is one of the smallest branches in the corpus despite in-situ monitoring being a cited focus of the second-most-cited patent in the corpus (in-situ monitoring and feedback). Closed-loop melt-pool control, layer-by-layer defect detection, and real-time parameter adjustment remain comparatively sparse relative to their technical importance. This branch has plausible entry paths for players with sensor integration or industrial control expertise — including established process-control vendors not yet prominent in the SLM ranking — and aligns with the growing demand for qualification and certification of additively manufactured aerospace and medical parts.
Search this in Eureka →How leading applicants differ by technology route
Strength of each leader across the main technology routes.
| Player | B33Y 10 · Additive manufacturing (3D printing) | B22F 10 · Powder metallurgy | B33Y 30 · Additive manufacturing (3D printing) | B29C 64 · Shaping of plastics | B22F 3 · Powder metallurgy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| General Electric Company | Strong · 923 | Strong · 470 | Strong · 719 | Strong · 666 | Strong · 618 |
| Concept Laser GmbH | Strong · 237 | Strong · 185 | Strong · 300 | Strong · 329 | Moderate · 92 |
| Renishaw PLC | Strong · 198 | Strong · 143 | Strong · 227 | Strong · 213 | Strong · 181 |
| Siemens AG | Strong · 252 | Moderate · 90 | Strong · 152 | Strong · 186 | Strong · 267 |
| Hewlett Packard Development Company LP | Strong · 279 | Absent | Strong · 224 | Strong · 421 | Absent |
| Velo3D Inc | Strong · 146 | Absent | Strong · 184 | Strong · 128 | Strong · 122 |
Frequently asked questions
The corpus covers 16,958 patent families globally. The United States is the leading jurisdiction for protection, followed by China and Europe (EPO).
General Electric Co holds the top position with 1,228 patent families, roughly three times the count of second-ranked Renishaw PLC at 387 patent families.
No. Annual filing volume peaked in 2018 at 2,595 families and has declined since. The lifecycle stage is assessed as Decline, reflecting a 32% contraction in the multi-year window. Figures for 2024 and 2025 are subject to publication lag and will rise as pending applications publish, but the broader downward trend from 2018 is established.
B33Y (additive manufacturing / 3D printing) and B22F (powder metallurgy) are the dominant IPC branches. B29C (shaping of plastics) is the third-largest, reflecting multi-material and polymer-based additive approaches. Medical and dental branches (A61C, A61F) and aerospace-related classes (F01D turbines, B64C aircraft) are also represented, indicating broad application spread.
Among major filers, Align Technology shows the strongest momentum at ▲ +112% recent versus the prior three-year period, followed by Velo3D at ▲ +164% and Divergent Technologies at ▲ +22%. In contrast, most incumbent volume leaders — General Electric (▼ -59%), Hewlett Packard Development (▼ -89%), and Siemens AG (▼ -85%) — show contracting recent activity.
Two under-served branches stand out: C22C (alloys), where SLM-optimised alloy compositions remain sparsely claimed relative to their technical importance, and G05B (control and regulating systems), where closed-loop melt-pool monitoring and in-process defect detection are under-represented despite being critical for aerospace and medical part qualification. Both branches have plausible entry paths for applicants with deep metallurgical or industrial-control expertise.
Ready to map your own selective laser melting landscape?
Join 18,000+ innovators using PatSnap Eureka to map any technology landscape: search 2B+ patents and papers, surface key assignees, and generate a report like this in minutes.
Disclaimer. This page is generated from PatSnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent and scientific-literature records, and is provided for general information and reference only.
Patent data carries inherent limitations: recent filings (typically the most recent 18–24 months) are under-counted due to standard publication lag; counts may be reported at either a patent-family or a patent-record basis and are not always directly comparable; classification, applicant-name, and citation data may contain errors, duplicates, or omissions; and the underlying search query defines and constrains the scope shown. As a result, the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing on this page constitutes an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate, or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent, legal, and domain professionals. PatSnap makes no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, or fitness for any particular purpose of the information presented.