Spinning & Yarn Machinery Patents: Who Leads, Where Gaps Are 2026
- Filing has cooled since its 2022 peak of 22 records, with the partial 2026 count of 2 sitting well below the mid-decade high — a maturing claim landscape rather than a growing one.
- D01H carries 642 of 683 records, meaning almost every filing in this corpus touches core spinning and twisting mechanics, while adjacent motor-control and chemical-treatment classes stay thin.
- Only 9 co-assignee pairs exist across 683 families, so most applicants file alone — collaboration is the exception, concentrated around a handful of Japanese machinery and fibre firms.
What this patent set covers
This landscape draws on 683 patent families published between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine spinning-machine terminology — spinning speed, yarn evenness, automatic doffing, breakage rate — with IPC coverage in D01H (spinning and twisting), D01H4 (open-end and rotor spinning) and D02G3 (yarn texturing). It captures the mechanical and control-system side of yarn formation rather than fibre chemistry or downstream weaving.
Publication naturally lags filing by around 18 months, so the 2026 count understates actual filing activity for that year; treat the most recent one to two years as provisional rather than a confirmed decline.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 683 families: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.
A peak in 2022, then a pullback
Filings rose from 12 in 2017 to a peak of 22 in 2022, then eased off. With 2026 still partial at 2 records, the honest read is a market that has stopped expanding rather than one in freefall — later filings simply haven't published yet.
D01H dominates; everything else is a satellite
D01H (spinning and twisting) accounts for 642 of 683 records — nearly the entire corpus. B65H (web and filament handling, 118) and D02G (yarn texturing, 67) are the next-largest classes, while motor control (H02P, 13), man-made filament spinning (D01D, 10) and textile chemical treatment (D06M, 7) remain thinly claimed relative to the core mechanics.
Shares are the percentage of the 683 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Spinning and Yarn Formation Machinery with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about spinning and yarn formation machinery and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe foundational claims still shaping the field
Spinning machine with semi-automatic doffing (EP4101956A1)
Filed by Savio Macchine Tessili, this December 2022 application claims a spinning unit with a reel-holder arm carrying an active tailstock and a yarn-hooking tailstock, letting the machine intercept and pick up yarn mechanically during doffing rather than requiring full manual intervention.Positioned between fully manual and fully automatic doffing — a middle-ground architecture rather than a wholesale automation claim.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US3810352A | Automatic yarn piecing apparatus for a continuous ringless spinning machine and method of using same | 75 |
| 2 | US3791126A | Automatic doffing apparatus | 54 |
| 3 | US5419110A | Piecing method and apparatus in a spinning machine | 47 |
| 4 | US4843808A | Method and device for monitoring the quality of yarns and wound packages produced by and the quality of opera… | 46 |
| 5 | US5119308A | Control system for spinning machine | 40 |
| 6 | US5188892A | Spun textile yarns | 39 |
| 7 | CN201245734Y | 一种熨烫纺纱装置 | 35 |
| 8 | US3962855A | Start-spinning apparatus which travels along an open-end spinning machine | 35 |
| 9 | US4121409A | Yarn piecing and knotting device for pneumatic spinning apparatus | 34 |
| 10 | CN104762704A | 一种新型纳米级静电摩擦纺纱装置 | 29 |
Citation counts favour older filings that have had more time to accumulate citations within this searched corpus — read them as markers of foundational influence, not current commercial relevance.
Patent titles are shown in the language they were filed in, not translated, so that each record stays verifiable against the original filing — a translated title will not match in Eureka or in any national register. Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Eureka on the web
When you want the answer in the next five minutes.
The agent works the prompt against patents and technical literature, citing every source.
Run your analysis now →MCP server & REST API
When it has to run inside your own pipeline.
Patent search, landscape analysis and assignee resolution as MCP tools. Drop them into any agent framework, or call REST directly.
Browse MCP servers →What the numbers mean for a filing decision
Three signals worth weighing before drafting into this space.
Activity has plateaued, not collapsed
The 2022 peak of 22 records followed by a drop to 2 in the still-publishing 2026 window looks steep, but the 18-month publication lag means recent filings are undercounted. Treat this as a maturing field with occupied core claims, not a shrinking one.
Core spinning mechanics are densely claimed
Nearly every family in this set sits inside D01H, spinning and twisting. New drafting there faces heavy prior art; the more open ground sits in the smaller adjacent classes that see far fewer filings.
Filing is mostly solo
With only 9 co-assignee pairs identified, joint filing is rare in this field. The pairs that do exist cluster around a small group of Japanese machinery and fibre-materials firms, suggesting supplier-customer or licensing relationships rather than broad industry consortia.
Filing is spread across Japan, Europe and China
Japan, the EPO and China each carry over 100 records, with India, the US and the UK following behind. This is a genuinely multi-regional filing pattern rather than one dominated by a single jurisdiction.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to spinning and yarn formation machinery, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where momentum has gone quiet
Recent-year momentum across the tracked assignees is flat to negative — a sign that the leading filers have slowed rather than that new entrants are displacing them.
Rieti CZ still filing, but slower
Rieti Czech shows 1 filing in the latest year against an 80% year-on-year drop — still active, but well off its earlier pace.
Established machinery makers have gone quiet in-window
Murata Machinery (-100% YoY), Toyota Industries, Rieter's Swiss entity, Howa Machinery and Toray all show zero filings in the latest tracked year. This is consistent with the publication lag rather than necessarily a withdrawal from the space.
The strongest pairing sits inside one supply relationship
The Toyota Industries and Daiwabo Co. pairing (9 shared families) is the strongest co-assignee link in the set, ahead of Murata Machinery with Takemoto Yushi (5) and Toyota Industries with Nisshinbo (4). These look like fibre-and-machinery supply pairings rather than open consortia.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Rieter CZ s.r.o. | 1 | -80% |
| Murata Machinery, Ltd. | 0 | -100% |
| Toyota Industries Corporation | 0 | — |
| Rieter Machine Works, Ltd. (Switzerland) | 0 | — |
| Howa Machinery, Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Toray Industries, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Oerlikon Textile GmbH & Co. KG | 0 | — |
| Donghua University | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a field with dense core claims and a few thin adjacent branches. Here is how to act on that.
Map your own claims against D01H density
If your drafting sits inside core spinning and twisting mechanics, expect to design around the cited foundational patents rather than file cleanly.
Explore the IPC breakdown in Eureka →Check the under-claimed branches before committing R&D spend
Motor-control feedback and man-made filament process claims carry a fraction of the filings that core spinning mechanics do — worth a freedom-to-operate check before assuming the space is open.
Run a white-space search in Eureka →Track the quiet leaders, not just the active filers
Several established machinery makers show zero filings in the latest tracked year. Given the publication lag, that may reverse — worth monitoring rather than assuming withdrawal.
Set up assignee alerts in Eureka →Common questions about this landscape
The corpus of 683 patent families shows filing concentrated among a handful of established machinery and fibre-materials firms, including Japanese groups such as Toyota Industries, Murata Machinery and Toray, alongside European makers like Rieter and Savio. Filing is otherwise long-tailed, with many single-filing entrants across China, India and Europe. Ranking by raw count favours firms with long filing histories, so newer entrants may be under-represented in a cumulative view.
Filings rose from 12 in 2017 to a peak of 22 in 2022, then declined in the years that followed, with only 2 records so far in 2026. Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the most recent one to two years are undercounted and the true trend for 2025-2026 will only become clear later. On the evidence available now, the field looks flat to declining rather than expanding.
D01H, covering spinning and twisting mechanisms, dominates with 642 of 683 records — essentially the entire corpus touches this class. B65H (web, sheet and filament handling, 118 records) and D02G (yarn texturing and crimping, 67 records) are secondary but meaningful. Smaller classes like H02P (motor control), D01D (man-made filament spinning) and D06M (chemical treatment) see far fewer filings and represent comparatively open claim space.
EP4101956A1, filed by Savio Macchine Tessili, claims a spinning machine with a reel-holder arm fitted with an active tailstock and a yarn-hooking tailstock, enabling semi-automatic doffing where the machine mechanically intercepts and picks up yarn. It sits between manual and fully automatic doffing architectures, so it constrains that specific mechanical approach rather than automatic doffing generally — designs using different pickup mechanisms or fully automated tube-handling may still have room to operate. Anyone drafting in this exact tailstock configuration should review the claim scope closely before filing.
The thinnest-claimed adjacent branches relative to core D01H mechanics are motor-control feedback systems for spinning drives (H02P, 13 records), man-made filament spinning process control (D01D, 10 records) and in-line chemical finishing during yarn formation (D06M, 7 records). These smaller classes carry far less prior art than the crowded core spinning and twisting space, making them more promising territory for a defensible first claim, though a proper freedom-to-operate search is still necessary before committing R&D spend.
Research Spinning and Yarn Formation Machinery in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole spinning and yarn formation machinery corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.
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.
Machine translation. Assignee and organisation names originally recorded in Chinese, Japanese or Korean have been rendered into English by an AI translation step so that the tables stay readable. These renderings are best-effort and may not match a company’s registered English name; the original name is what the underlying patent record carries, and it is what any Eureka query launched from this page uses.