University profile · TU Dortmund · 2013–2024

TU Dortmund held its filing volume and changed its content: mechanical engineering halved between the two cohorts.

123 patent families from 247 applications, compared across two complete five-year cohorts: 2013–2017 (55 families) and 2018–2022 (46).

Data
EPO PATSTAT Global, Spring 2026 (patstat-mtc.patstat_2026a)
Unit
DOCDB family, dated by its first filing year
Scope
Applicant name: twelve spellings of Technische Universität Dortmund
Queries
Query 0 to Query 12, all published
Families by WIPO sector (non-exclusive) · front row 2013–2017, back row 2018–2022Query 5
  1. 26 → 13

    families in mechanical engineering, 2013–2017 against 2018–2022, while Instruments rose from 13 to 15.

    Technology
  2. 47.8%

    PCT rate in 2018–2022, up from 43.6%. The US share rose from 14.5% to 21.7%.

    Cohorts
  3. 37.0%

    of the 2018–2022 families never leave the German office, up from 27.3%.

    Cohorts
  4. 18 → 6

    families naming A. Erman Tekkaya, the most frequent inventor, first cohort against second.

    Inventors
  5. 17.1%

    of the 123 families (21) carry a second applicant.

    Partners

01 · Activity

Between 7 and 15 new families in every one of twelve years

From 2013 to 2024 TU Dortmund is named applicant on 247 applications in 123 DOCDB families. Each family sits in the earliest filing year across all of its members, so the years add up to 123 without double counting.

2013–2017

55 families, an average of 11.0 a year, with 2.04 applications per family.

2018–2022

46 families, 9.2 a year, 2.15 applications per family. A difference of two or three families in one year is not a trend; the cohort view is the more reliable comparison.

2023–2024, provisional

22 families, still being published into PATSTAT. They appear in the trend and in the list of recent titles, and are held out of every cohort comparison.

Patent families and applications by first filing year

Data table: families and applications by year
Families and applications by first filing year (* provisional)
First filing yearPatent familiesApplicationsCohort
20139192013–2017
201411252013–2017
20157142013–2017
201615262013–2017
201713282013–2017
20187142018–2022
201912252018–2022
202010192018–2022
202110222018–2022
20227192018–2022
2023*1119held out
2024*1117held out
Total123247

Query 2 · 18.4 GBHatched: provisional years

02 · Cohorts

The 2018–2022 cohort reaches further abroad, and more of it stays at home

The cohorts are close in size, 55 and 46 families. The PCT rate rises from 43.6% to 47.8% and the US share from 14.5% to 21.7%, while the EP share falls from 60.0% to 54.3%; average authorities per family rise from 2.05 to 2.24. At the same time more families stay at the German office alone, 15 to 17, or 27.3% to 37.0%. That is consistent with a two-track portfolio. The underlying differences are 2 to 7 families, so the direction is better supported than the magnitude.

Share of cohort families reaching each route (%)

Data table: cohort comparison
Cohort comparison, family level (* grant figures not comparable)
Metric2013–20172018–2022
Patent families5546
Applications by TU Dortmund11299
Applications per family2.042.15
Families with a DE member41 (74.5%)36 (78.3%)
Families with an EP member33 (60.0%)25 (54.3%)
Families with a WO (PCT) member, PCT rate24 (43.6%)22 (47.8%)
Families with a US member8 (14.5%)10 (21.7%)
Families filed at DE only15 (27.3%)17 (37.0%)
Families at a single authority20 (36.4%)19 (41.3%)
Co-filed families (second applicant)11 (20.0%)7 (15.2%)
Average patent authorities per family2.052.24
Distinct patent authorities reached1012
Families with at least one granted member*30 (54.5%)10 (21.7%)

Query 3 · 16.8 GBCoverage counts family members: a family counts once per authority · grant figures: see Grants

03 · Technology

Mechanical engineering halved, from 26 to 13 families, almost all of it in machine tools

Machine tools fell from 17 families to 7. Instruments moved the other way, 13 to 15, carried by measurement: the largest single field in the second cohort with 12 families against 8. Chemistry and electrical engineering stay close to flat at sector level while their mix shifts: biotechnology 2 to 5 and basic materials chemistry 1 to 4, against materials and metallurgy 5 to 0 and pharmaceuticals 4 to 1.

Patent families by WIPO sector and cohort (a family can sit in several)

Data table: WIPO sectors by cohort
WIPO sectors by cohort (* provisional)
WIPO sector2013–20172018–20222023–2024*Change (families)
Mechanical engineering26135−13
Chemistry18176−1
Electrical engineering17166−1
Instruments13157+2
Other fields103−1
Sum of sectors756127
Distinct families554622
Data table: WIPO fields
WIPO technology fields with 5 or more families (* provisional)
WIPO fieldSector2013–20172018–20222023–2024*Total
MeasurementInstruments812626
Machine toolsMechanical engineering177125
Other special machinesMechanical engineering84214
TelecommunicationsElectrical engineering46212
Electrical machinery, apparatus, energyElectrical engineering72312
Organic fine chemistryChemistry44311
Chemical engineeringChemistry44210
BiotechnologyChemistry2518
Computer technologyElectrical engineering3418
Macromolecular chemistry, polymersChemistry4206
PharmaceuticalsChemistry4116
Basic materials chemistryChemistry1416
Materials, metallurgyChemistry5005
Digital communicationElectrical engineering1315

Query 5 · 2.8 GB2023–2024 shown for orientation only, not part of the comparison

Multi-assignment. A family counts once in every sector and field its IPC codes map to, so the sector sums (75, 61, 27) exceed the distinct family counts (55, 46, 22). The sums are not a total.

04 · IPC

Sheet-metal working fell from 16 families to 3; materials analysis rose from 4 to 9

B21D and G01N are the two largest movements in the table and repeat what the sector view shows. G01R (electrical measurement) holds at 3 families in both cohorts and adds 3 more in 2023–2024; C12N (microorganisms and enzymes) grows from 1 family to 4. Plastics shaping (B29C) and additive manufacturing (B33Y) stay present throughout, which places part of the manufacturing work outside the sheet-metal decline.

Patent families in the twelve most frequent IPC subclasses, by cohort

Data table: IPC subclasses by cohort
IPC subclasses with four or more families (* provisional)
IPCSubclass title2013–20172018–20222023–2024*TotalChange (families)
B21DWorking or processing of sheet metal or metal tubes, rods or profiles163019−13
G01NInvestigating or analysing materials by determining their chemical or physical properties49316+5
B29CShaping or joining of plastics73212−4
H04BTransmission35210+2
G01RMeasuring electric variables; measuring magnetic variables33390
C07DHeterocyclic compounds2316+1
C12NMicroorganisms or enzymes; compositions thereof1416+3
A61KPreparations for medical, dental or toiletry purposes4116−3
B01JChemical or physical processes, e.g. catalysis or colloid chemistry3126−2
B33YAdditive manufacturing22150
G06FElectric digital data processing22150
B21CManufacture of metal sheets, wire, rods, tubes, profiles3205−1
H04WWireless communication networks1214+1
B01DSeparation2114−1
H02JElectric power networks; circuit arrangements for power supply3014−3
A61PSpecific therapeutic activity of chemical compounds3014−3

Query 6 · 3.9 GBNo percentage changes: every cohort figure is below 20 families

Multi-assignment. A family carries several IPC codes and counts once in each subclass. The 2013–2017 column of this table alone sums to 59 for 55 distinct families. Subclass counts are not shares of the portfolio.

05 · Inventors

A. Erman Tekkaya is named on 18 first-cohort families and on 6 in the second

This is the largest change in the inventor record and runs in the same direction as sheet-metal working. Of the 24 inventors on three or more families, 8 have no family in the first cohort (Palzer, Böcker, Hering, Thommes, Brümmer, Ortiz Perez, Kockmann, Jenau); their areas, sensing, communications and process engineering, match the fields that grow. Eleven of the 24 are named in both cohorts and five only in the first; of those in both, two hold their count (Wietfeld 3 and 3, Frei 2 and 3).

The twelve inventors with the most families, by cohort

Data table: inventors on three or more families
Inventors on three or more families (* provisional)
Inventor2013–20172018–20222023–2024*Total
Tekkaya, A. Erman186024
Palzer, Stefan0527
Wietfeld, Christian3317
Frei, Stephan2316
Rehtanz, Christian5005
Künne, Bernd3115
Tiller, Jörg Christian4105
Gies, Soeren5005
Meya, Rickmer3104
Katzenberg, Frank3104
Böcker, Stefan0314
Brunschweiger, Andreas2103
Klika Skopic, Mateja2103
Krautwald, Tim2103
Ben Khalifa, Noomane2103
Pfost, Martin3003
Wernicke, Sebastian3003
Staupendahl, Daniel3003
Hering, Oliver0303
Thommes, Markus0213
Brümmer, Andreas0213
Ortiz Perez, Alvaro0213
Kockmann, Norbert0123
Jenau, Frank0123

Query 7 · 6.5 GBName variants merged by a case-, punctuation- and word-order-insensitive key

06 · Where

96 of 123 families have a German member, and the international routes rearrange around it

The DE share rises slightly between the cohorts, from 74.5% to 78.3%. The second cohort reaches more distinct authorities, 12 against 10, including first-time filings at KR, IL, MX, AU and ES with a single family each. With the DE-only share rising from 27.3% to 37.0%, the portfolio spreads out at the top and concentrates at the bottom. All of these movements rest on differences of 2 to 7 families.

Patent authorities reached by the 123 families, 2013–2024

Data table: patent authorities reached
Patent authorities reached, 2013–2024 (* provisional)
Authority2013–20172018–20222023–2024*Total families
DE · DPMA41361996
EP · EPO3325462
WO · PCT24221157
US · USPTO810119
JP · JPO2204
CN · CNIPA1203
CA · CIPO1102
LU, FR, DK1 each001 each
IL, MX, AU, ES, KR01 each01 each
TW0011
Sum of the nine single-family authorities (9 authority-family pairs across 7 distinct families)3519
Distinct authorities1012516

Query 3 · 16.8 GBNon-exclusive: a family appears under every authority it reaches (Query 4)

Share of cohort families at each main authority (%)

Data table: share of cohort families per authority
Share of cohort families per main authority
Authority2013–2017 (n=55)2018–2022 (n=46)Change
DE · DPMA41 · 74.5%36 · 78.3%+3.8 pp
EP · EPO33 · 60.0%25 · 54.3%−5.7 pp
WO · PCT24 · 43.6%22 · 47.8%+4.2 pp
US · USPTO8 · 14.5%10 · 21.7%+7.2 pp
Families at DE only15 · 27.3%17 · 37.0%+9.7 pp

Query 3 · 16.8 GBMembers filed by any applicant of the family count

2023–2024 is provisional. National and regional phases of PCT applications from these filing years are largely still ahead, which is why EP and US coverage is low there. Those two years are excluded from the cohort comparison.

07 · Partners

21 of 123 families carry a second applicant, and almost every partner appears once

The 21 co-filed families involve 21 organisations and four individuals. Only Universität Duisburg-Essen and the Max-Planck-Gesellschaft appear on two families each, and each pair straddles two periods. The mix is academic and research-heavy in both cohorts: 6 of 12 partner records in 2013–2017, 4 of 8 in 2018–2022. The only partners outside Germany are Astrol Electronic (CH) in the first cohort and, in the provisional 2023–2024 window, Northeastern University and New York University in Abu Dhabi on one shared family.

Co-filing rate by cohort

CohortFamiliesCo-filed familiesShare
2013–2017551120.0%
2018–202246715.2%
2023–2024*22313.6%
2013–20241232117.1%
Data table: co-applicants by cohort
Co-applicants by cohort (* provisional)
PartnerType2013–20172018–20222023–2024*Families
Universität Duisburg-EssenUniversity1012
Max-Planck-GesellschaftResearch0112
Karlsruher Institut für TechnologieUniversity1001
Technische Universität BerlinUniversity1001
Ernst-Moritz-Arndt-Universität GreifswaldUniversity1001
Technische Universität DresdenUniversity0101
Hochschule Hamm-LippstadtUniversity0101
Northeastern University (US)University0011
New York University in Abu Dhabi (AE)University0011
Fraunhofer-GesellschaftResearch0101
Leibniz-Institut für Analytische Wissenschaften, ISASResearch1001
ZBT GmbH, Zentrum für BrennstoffzellentechnikResearch1001
Bayer AGCompany0101
TRUMPF Werkzeugmaschinen GmbH + Co. KGCompany0101
Faurecia Emissions Control Technologies Germany GmbHCompany1001
Astrol Electronic AG (CH)Company1001
EF.Ruhr GmbHCompany1001
ISPT GmbH & Co. KGCompany1001
GDS Präzisionszerspanungs GmbHCompany0101
W2 Armaturen GmbHCompany0011
Bundesrepublik Deutschland (federal ministry)Government1001
Named individuals (4 persons on 2 families)Individual1102

Query 8 · 16.2 GBPartner rows sum above the co-filed families: two partners can share a family · Type assigned by mtc.berlin from name and legal form

08 · Grants

In the examined cohort the EPO granted 21 of 37 applications, the German office 7 of 40

Grant rates for 2018–2022 are not a quality signal. Examination runs for several years after filing, so applications from 2018 onwards are still substantially pending at every office and their grant share is bound to be lower. The two columns stand side by side because the numbers exist, not because they are comparable. The provisional 2023–2024 window is not shown.

For 2013–2017, 6 of 8 US applications were granted. The gap between DE (17.5%) and EP (56.8%) fits how these filings are used: 25 of the 41 families with a DE member in that cohort also have an EP or WO member, so the German application often serves as the priority filing for an international route. 15 families of the cohort never leave DE, and abandonment before examination would show up in that group.

Granted share of TU Dortmund applications by office and cohort (%)

Data table: grant outcomes by office and cohort
Grant outcomes by office and cohort, TU Dortmund applications (* depressed by pendency)
Office2013–2017 applicationsgrantedshare2018–2022 applicationsgrantedshare*
DE · DPMA40717.5%3612.8%
EP · EPO372156.8%26519.2%
US · USPTO8675.0%10440.0%
Data table: families with a granted member
Families with at least one granted member (* depressed by pendency)
CohortFamiliesWith a granted memberShare*
2013–2017553054.5%
2018–2022461021.7%
2023–202422522.7%

Query 9WO excluded: a PCT application is not examined for grant · US rests on 8 and 10 applications

Two of the 247 applications are German translations of granted European patents (appln_kind T), validations rather than new DPMA filings: one in the 2018–2022 column, one in 2023–2024. Query 9 was aggregated from the Query 2 result set to stay inside the query budget.

09 · Citations

The most cited family, filed in 2013, has 45 citing publications

It concerns hybrid simulation of a power distribution network together with its communication network. Four of the eleven most cited families sit in additive manufacturing and sheet forming (ranks 3, 4, 6 and 10), three in energy and grid technology (ranks 1, 7 and 8): the strengths of the earlier cohort. The one entry from the second cohort, a filament changer for 3D printing filed in 2018, has gathered 23 citing publications in a shorter window than any family above it.

The eleven most cited families by citing patent publications

Data table: most cited families
Eleven most cited families (two share rank 10)
#TitleFirst filing yearCiting publications
1Computer implemented method for hybrid simulation of power distribution network and associated communication network for real time applications201345
2Optical free-space transmission201433
3Method and device for the combined production of components by means of incremental sheet forming and additive methods in one clamping setup201431
4Device for three-dimensional additive printing operations, in particular for large-volume components, in particular according to the method of fused deposition molding (FDM)201427
5Method for monitoring airspace201423
6Device and method for changing filaments of different colour and/or different materials for the production of 3D printed parts and extruder with filament changing system201823
7Apparatus, used to produce hydrogen by thermal decomposition of e.g. methane, comprises pyrolysis reactor having reaction chamber present in form of capillary201321
8System and method for controlling the frequency stability and/or voltage stability of the distribution network201315
9Verfahren und Vorrichtung zur Ermittlung charakteristischer Materialkennwerte, insbesondere von Fließkurven von Leichtbauwerkstoffen, insbesondere für das Strangpressen201514
10Verfahren zur Herstellung thermoplastischer Faser-Metall-Laminat-Bauteile mittels Umformverfahren201413
10DNA-encoded chemical library, use thereof and method to synthesize the library201513
Data table: citation coverage by cohort
Citation coverage by cohort
CohortFamiliesWith at least one citationShareSum of per-family citing publications
2013–2017554174.5%358
2018–2022462860.9%91
2023–20242229.1%2
2013–20241237157.7%451

Query 10 · 16.2 GBTitles at ranks 7 and 10 shortened at a clause boundary

Citations are not normalised. The metric counts distinct citing patent publications per family, self-citations included. The coverage sum counts a publication citing two families twice. Older families have had more years to be cited, so the cohort figures cannot be read as a difference in impact.

10 · Recent filings

Seven of the 22 most recent filings measure or sense a physical quantity

Gas concentration, melt temperature in extrusion, partial discharge, electric current, material fatigue by ultrasound, battery state and spiroergometry: the area that grows in the field view (measurement: 8 families in 2013–2017, 12 in 2018–2022, 6 in these two provisional years). Five are chemistry or biotechnology filings. The remaining ten spread across 3D printing equipment, gas expansion machinery, gripping technology, mobile-network localisation, radio reflectors, adaptive filtering, tensor completion, heating surfaces, a roof-light element and a shower base unit. These two years are incomplete, so the list shows direction, not volume.

All 22 families first filed in 2023 or 2024, in filing order

First filing yearTitle
2023Cannabichromenic acid synthase variants and uses thereof
2023Compounds for use in the treatment of gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST)
2023Testing apparatus and method for assessing the fatigue behavior of a material on flat test pieces by means of ultrasound
2023Method for controlling a spiroergometry system
2023Shower base unit
2023Optically-based electric current metering system and use thereof
2023Sensor for determining the concentration of a gas
2023Active adaptive filter with a switch signal-based pre-control path and a switch signal delay function in the main path
2023Druckeinrichtung für den 3D-Druck
2023Vorrichtung und Verfahren zur nicht-invasiven Messung der Schmelzetemperatur in Extrusionsprozessen
2023Vorrichtung und Verfahren zur 3D-Tensor-Vervollständigung
2024Method and system for hydrogenating unsaturated hydrocarbon compounds
2024Apparatus and method for expanding gases that are under high pressure by means of an expansion machine that can be integrated into pressure control devices
2024Method for producing solids
2024Cellular user localization system: SMS side-channel timing analysis method and apparatus
2024Heizflächenelement, Heizflächeneinheit, Verfahren zum Betreiben einer Heizflächeneinheit
2024Broadband low-inductance ohmic-capacitive voltage divider for a partial discharge measurement
2024Reflector assembly for reflecting a radio signal
2024Integrated state monitoring function of a battery
2024Lichtdurchlasselement für ein Dachoberlicht
2024Greifvorrichtung zum kraftschlüssigen Greifen oder Positionieren von Bauteilen
2024Herstellung und Verwendung von kumulierten S-Yliden der Struktur R1R2S=CN2

Query 11 · 2.7 GBThe complete list, not a selection · English title where one exists · one title shortened · provisional data

11 · How we counted

How the numbers were counted

  • One family, dated onceA DOCDB family is dated by the minimum filing year across all of its members, taken before the 2013–2024 window is applied, so the annual figures add to exactly 123. Pseudo-families (docdb_family_id 0) are excluded.
  • Two complete, equal cohorts2013–2017 and 2018–2022. A cohort ending in 2023 or 2024 would measure publication lag; a six-year block against a five-year block would show a decline from arithmetic alone. 55 + 46 + 22 = 123.
  • Scope on person_name, not han_nameTwelve spellings of Technische Universität Dortmund with an application filed 2013–2024 are kept, from the standard forms to character damage and re-orderings.
  • Two levels kept apartFamily facts (first year, presence at an authority, any granted member) use all members of the family; application counts and grant rates use the applications TU Dortmund itself filed. The PCT rate is the share of families with any WO member; both readings were computed and agree (24, 22 and 11 families per cohort).
Checks and limits
  • han_name contamination, measuredFive of the twelve spellings carry han_name TECHNISCHE UNIVERSITAT MUNCHEN. That group holds 30 distinct person_name values and 1,074 families with a 2013–2024 filing: 102 TU Dortmund, 973 other organisations, among them Technische Universität München and Technische Universität Berlin.
  • han_name fragmentation, measuredTU Dortmund spreads over seven han_name groups. The largest clean group covers 31 families; the other five clean groups hold one or two each.
  • ExclusionsFachhochschule Dortmund (two spellings with 9 and 1 in-window families), the Leibniz-Institut für Arbeitsforschung an der TU Dortmund and the Institut für Arbeitsphysiologie (legally independent, no in-window families), and the pre-2007 name Universität Dortmund (last filing year 2011, nothing in the window).
  • Non-Latin names searchedOne Chinese rendering exists on one family, which is already in scope through its Latin-spelled members.
  • Partners on the same documentCo-applicants are joined on appln_id and TU Dortmund is removed by person_id, so no spelling of the university reappears as its own partner. A family whose members are filed separately by two organisations does not count as a collaboration.
  • Patents of invention onlyipr_type PI removes exactly one application, a German utility model filed in 2019 whose family stays in scope. There are no design filings.
  • Small numbers7 to 15 families per year; most cohort differences are 2 to 7 families. Percentages always stand beside absolute counts, and no percentage change is given where the base is below ten.
  • 2023 and 2024 are provisionalShown separately and excluded from every comparison.
  • Grant ratesFilings from 2018 onwards are depressed by examination pendency and not comparable with 2013–2017. PCT applications are excluded from the grant table.
  • Applicant-only viewInventions by TU Dortmund researchers where the university is not applicant are outside this portfolio.
  • Editorial sector labelsPATSTAT carries no sector field; partner types were assigned by mtc.berlin from name and legal form.
  • Filing year, not publication yearRegister searches counting by publication year return different totals for the same period.
  • Not in this reportNo top-applicants ranking (the applicant is the subject). No external benchmark: the university's transfer pages state no annual application count, so that check was not performed rather than reported as passed.
  • ClassificationThe portfolio is defined by applicant name, so subtree expansion and predecessor union do not apply. Subclass titles are joined on symbol_patstat without an is_active filter; WIPO fields come from tls230_appln_techn_field.
  • Aggregated, then verifiedGrant outcomes by office and cohort, the annual series and the DE-only and single-authority counts were aggregated from the Query 2 result set to stay inside the budget; Query 3 verifies the cohort totals against the database.
  • EditionComputed on 15 August 2026 against EPO PATSTAT Global, Spring 2026 (patstat-mtc.patstat_2026a), IPC 20260101 and CPC 202608.

The base set: applications and family-level facts

Query 2 · 18.4 GBqueries.sql · 14 executed queries, 0.9088 EUR in total

Release protocol

  1. Agentsearch + draftDefined the applicant scope and queried PATSTAT read-only. Every number comes from SQL.
  2. Checks13 rulesEvery claim must trace back to a query; chart and table must agree.
  3. Reviewsubject expertChecks scope, counts and wording before publication.
  4. Approvalsecond personA second person not involved in the report approves publication.

Next step

Which institution or technology should we compare over time for you?

A report like this one starts at 1,500 € plus VAT. Or learn to build it yourself on the EPO's Technology Intelligence Platform.

Book a scoping call · Training for PATLIB centres