Vapor Degreasing Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- 63.6% of all 77 records sit with the top five assignees combined — filing here is concentrated, not fragmented.
- Filing peaked in 2017 at 12 and has fallen every year since, with the most recent year showing zero (publication lag understates the last 12-18 months).
- C23G and C11D cover 84.4% and 79.2% of records respectively, while B01D separation processes sit at just 1.3% — a visible gap next to a crowded core.
Top-5 share is the combined record count of the five largest assignees divided by all 77 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
Vapor degreasing and solvent cleaning patents concern the equipment and chemistries used to strip contaminants from metal and electronic parts using a boiling solvent sump and its condensing vapor blanket. The scope here is narrowed to records that explicitly discuss solvent selection, emission control, boiling sump design, solvent recovery still operation, regulatory restriction compliance, or residue level control — the operational and formulation concerns that separate a working degreasing line from a laboratory demonstration.
The 77 records in scope span 2015 through mid-2026, drawing from receiving offices led by the United States, with meaningful activity at the EPO, in the United Kingdom, through WIPO's PCT route, and in Canada and Australia.
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 77-record set: how filing activity has moved year over year, and how those records distribute across IPC subclasses.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filing ran at 12 records in 2017, its peak in the dataset, and has declined in the years since, reaching zero in the most recent year. That final data point is partial — publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so recent-year totals are always undercounts rather than a true stop in activity.
IPC subclass composition
C23G (cleaning of metal surfaces) and C11D (detergents and cleaning compositions) dominate, appearing in 84.4% and 79.2% of the 77 records respectively — expected given the topic's core is solvent chemistry applied to metal parts. C07C organic compound claims appear in 27.3% of records, while B08B general cleaning equipment, C09K materials, H05K electronics assemblies, and B01D separation processes each cover a smaller slice, with B01D at just 1.3%. Records can carry more than one class, so these shares add to more than 100%.
Shares are the percentage of the 77 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Vapor Degreasing and Solvent Cleaning with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about vapor degreasing and solvent cleaning and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative and most-cited records
US4341567A — Method of vapor degreasing
A contaminated article is subjected to vapor degreasing operations wherein the vapor degreasing solvent is a blend consisting essentially of methylene chloride and either 1,1,1-trichloroethane or trichloroethylene. Addition of methylene chloride to the solvent blend is found to stabilize the other component of the blend in the presence of contaminants encountered in the conventional vapor degreasing process; thus extending the normal life of the degreasing solvents.Filed by Southdown Environmental Systems Inc., 1982-07-27 — one of the earliest solvent-stabilization approaches in this dataset's lineage.
View full record| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20170283959A1 | Method for cleaning articles using nonflammable, azeotropic or azeotrope-like composition | 39 |
| 2 | US6048832A | Compositions of 1-bromopropane, 4-methoxy-1,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4-nonafluorobutane and an organic solvent | 32 |
| 3 | WO1992010453A1 | Stabilized 1,1-dichloro-1-fluoroethane | 31 |
| 4 | US6100229A | Compositions of 1,1,1,3,3,-pentafluoropropane and chlorinated ethylenes | 28 |
| 5 | US5142873A | Vapor control system for vapor degreasing/defluxing equipment | 22 |
| 6 | US6365565B1 | Compositions of 1-bromopropane and an organic solvent | 19 |
| 7 | US6103684A | Compositions of 1-bromopropane and an organic solvent | 18 |
| 8 | WO1995019947A1 | Hydrofuoroalkanes as cleaning and degreasing solvents | 16 |
| 9 | US6010997A | Compositions of 1-bromopropane, nitromethane or acetonitrile and an alcohol | 15 |
| 10 | US5085238A | Vapor degreasing apparatus | 15 |
Citation counts are drawn from within this searched corpus and favor older, longer-indexed records — treat them as a marker of influence on later filings, not of present-day relevance.
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 say
Reading the concentration, trend and geography data together points to a field that consolidated early and has since gone quiet at the filing stage.
Ownership sits with a small group
The top five assignees combined hold 63.6% of all 77 records in scope, and the top ten hold 85.7%. With the leader alone at 21 records against a fifth-place count of 6 and a tenth-place count of 2, this is a landscape with a dominant filer, a mid-tier of active competitors, and then a steep drop-off.
Filing has cooled since 2017
2017 was the peak year at 12 filed records, and the count has fallen in every subsequent year through the most recent one, which shows zero. Recent-year momentum data for several established filers also shows zero in the latest year, though the true recent picture is softened by the roughly 18-month lag between filing and publication.
Core chemistry claims are dense; separation is thin
C23G and C11D together anchor the field, appearing in the large majority of records. B01D, covering separation processes such as filtration used in solvent recovery, appears in only 1.3% of records — a narrow footprint relative to how central solvent recovery stills are to the operational side of this technology.
US-centered with meaningful PCT and European filing
The United States leads receiving-office counts at 27, followed by the EPO at 12 and the United Kingdom at 10. WIPO's PCT route accounts for 9 filings, with Canada and Australia rounding out the tracked offices — a filing footprint that favors US and European protection over broad multi-jurisdiction coverage.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to vapor degreasing and solvent cleaning, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the field is open
The ranked leaders are chemical and industrial-gas majors with long-running solvent portfolios, sitting above a long tail of single- or few-filing entrants including universities and smaller specialty formulators.
One filer well ahead of the field
The top-ranked assignee holds 21 records, more than triple the fifth-place count of 6. That gap suggests a filer with a sustained, multi-generation solvent chemistry program rather than opportunistic filing.
A cluster of steady but smaller programs
Between fifth and tenth place, family counts step down from 6 to 2, indicating several assignees with active but modest portfolios rather than a single clear second-place challenger.
A narrow field of named filers
Only 20 companies appear in the assignee ranking at all, and it is the complete list the dataset returns — not a top-50 or top-100 cut. Beyond the ranked group, filing activity in this space is thin.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Honeywell International Inc. | 0 | — |
| RHO CHEM A CALIFORNIA | 0 | — |
| E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. | 0 | — |
| Eastman Chemical Company | 0 | — |
| PPG Industries Ohio, Inc. | 0 | — |
| ENVIRO TECH INT | 0 | — |
| VULCAN MATERIALS CO | 0 | — |
| Dow Chemical Company | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The concentration and IPC data point to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, portfolio strategy, or identifying an entry point.
Check freedom-to-operate against the ranked leaders
With 85.7% of records held by the top ten assignees, any new filing in core solvent chemistry or sump design should be checked against those portfolios first, not the long tail.
Run a freedom-to-operate checkExplore the B01D and H05K gaps
Separation-process and printed-circuit-assembly classes carry the lowest record shares in this dataset, which may reflect genuine white space rather than lack of relevance.
Explore adjacent IPC classesWatch for a filing rebound
The drop to zero in the most recent year is partly a publication-lag artifact; tracking filings as they publish over the next 12-18 months will clarify whether the 2017 peak was a permanent high point.
Set up filing alertsCommon questions on this landscape
The assignee ranking for this dataset is led by a single company with 21 of the 77 records in scope, well ahead of the rest of the field. The top five assignees combined hold 63.6% of all records, and the top ten hold 85.7%, meaning ownership is concentrated rather than spread evenly across the 20 companies that make up the full ranked list. Anyone doing freedom-to-operate work in this space should prioritize checking those top-ranked portfolios before looking at the long tail of single-filing entrants.
Filing in this dataset peaked at 12 records in 2017 and has fallen in every year since, reaching zero in the most recent year. Part of that drop is real: several established filers show zero activity in their most recent-year momentum figures. But part of it is a measurement artifact — publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so the last year or two of any patent trend will always look weaker than the underlying filing activity actually was.
C23G covers cleaning of metal surfaces and appears in 84.4% of the 77 records in scope, making it the single most common classification in this landscape. C11D covers detergents and cleaning compositions more broadly and appears in 79.2% of records. Many records carry both classes at once, since a solvent formulation patent for metal parts often claims both the cleaning composition itself and its application to metal surfaces — which is why the two shares overlap rather than summing to 100%.
It is a smaller slice of the landscape than its operational importance in a working degreasing line would suggest. B01D, the IPC class covering separation processes such as the filtration used in solvent recovery stills, appears in only 1.3% of the 77 records in scope, versus 84.4% for core metal-cleaning claims. That gap makes solvent recovery and emission-control instrumentation one of the more visibly under-claimed branches in this dataset, worth a closer look for anyone assessing where new claims could still be staked.
US4341567A, filed by Southdown Environmental Systems Inc. and granted in 1982, claims a vapor degreasing method using a blend of methylene chloride with either 1,1,1-trichloroethane or trichloroethylene, where the methylene chloride stabilizes the other solvent component against contaminant breakdown. It represents an early solvent-stabilization approach rather than a current commercial baseline, since both trichloroethylene and 1,1,1-trichloroethane face substantial regulatory restriction today. Its relevance now is mostly as prior art establishing the stabilizer-blend concept, which later, more-cited filings in this dataset build on with different solvent chemistries.
Research Vapor Degreasing and Solvent Cleaning in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole vapor degreasing and solvent cleaning 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.