Late 19th and early 20th Wearable devices that fit the modern definition of an exoskeleton were developed in the mid to late 1800s and early 1900s. However, at the time, the term exoskeleton was not common, and the exoskeleton category was not well defined. Thus, many of the exoskeleton-like, predecessor devices were called names like braces, supporters, pedometers, or apparati. These included devices to assist posture, mobility (e.g., walking, running, jumping), physical work (e.g., bending, lifting, sitting, shoveling, tool-handling), and various body parts (e.g., legs, back, arms). These early exoskeleton-like devices spanned a wide range of structures and functions, including rigid and soft exoskeletons, and passive (elastic) and powered (active) exoskeletons. However, from the limited historical records it appears that most of these devices were prototypes or concepts, most were not commercialized, and none achieved wide adoption. Various exoskeleton-like devices were developed between the mid 1800s and 1930s to assist with prolonged bending posture and other common agricultural work tasks. These included both rigid exoskeleton-like devices and soft exosuit-like devices. Some of these devices were fully on-body devices and worked by providing assistive forces and torques in parallel with the user's muscles, while other devices assisted by transmitting forces to the ground, for instance, during seated posture or stooping. There were also a variety of tool-handling exoskeleton-like devices, for holding items such as rifles, fishing rods, and umbrellas. During this same period, there were also exoskeleton-like devices designed to facilitate walking, running, or other locomotor activities. These included both rigid and soft devices, as well as devices that were both passive (elastic) and powered (active). One example of an early passive rigid exoskeleton-like device was an apparatus developed around 1890 by Russian engineer Nicholas Yagin. This device consisted of bow springs connected between the user's waist and feet, and was intended to use elastic energy storage and return to assist walking, running, or jumping. An example of an early powered soft exosuit-like device was an apparatus developed by United States inventor Leslie Kelley around 1917 to augment running. This device consisted of a backpack-worn steam engine (powered actuator), which assisted the user by controlling and transmitting mechanical power to wires (artificial ligaments) that ran in parallel with the user's muscles. Various other exoskeleton-like devices were developed to facilitate locomotion or assist people with physical disabilities.
Mid 20th Exoskeleton-like devices continued to be developed throughout the middle of the 20th century. This marked a period of exploration into the possibilities and challenges of wearable assistive technologies for human augmentation and rehabilitation purposes. This period also marked the emergence of one of the first exoskeleton success stories, in the form of wearable camera stabilizers. However, this was a niche solution and there was no broader exoskeleton market at the time, so this technology largely developed and matured as its own category. Even today, camera stabilizers are generally considered their own category and not included as exoskeletons, despite fitting the definition. In 1951, the U.S. Army
Ballistics Research Laboratory (BRL) initiated a study of powered exoskeletons to aid soldiers, and by 1963, BRL's researcher S. Zaroodny published a report where he proposed a design for a powered exoskeleton and evaluation of a pneumatically powered prototype device. Although the project was not pursued further, the report systematically analyzed the engineering challenges of creating an exoskeleton device to enhance human performance. In the 1960s, another exoskeleton called the
Hardiman gained notoriety due to its level of sophistication, though it was not commercialized. It was co-developed by
General Electric and the
US Armed Forces. This exoskeleton was powered by hydraulics and electricity and amplified the wearer's strength by a factor of 25, so that lifting 110 kilograms (240 lb) would feel like lifting 4.5 kilograms (10 lb). A feature called force feedback enabled the wearer to feel the forces and objects being manipulated. However, the Hardiman had major limitations, including its 680-kilogram (1,500 lb) weight. The Hardiman was designed as a master-slave system consisting of a set of overlapping exoskeletons: the slave device (outer exoskeleton) followed the motions of the master device (inner exoskeleton), which followed the motion of the human operator. The response time for the slave suit was slow, and control issues caused "violent and uncontrollable motion by the machine" when moving both legs simultaneously. Hardiman's slow walking speed of 0.76 meters per second (2.5 ft/s) further limited practical uses. During this time, various other exoskeletons were also being developed, which varied widely in design and characteristics; however, these were also mostly for research and demonstration purposes. There was also exploration into development and use of exoskeletons for clinical populations. For instance, in the 1970s Yugoslavia by a team led by Prof.
Miomir Vukobratović developed pneumatically powered and electronically controlled lower limb devices to assist in the rehabilitation of people with paralysis. In the 1970s, wearable
camera stabilizers were developed and popularized. These could be considered to be a type of tool-holding exoskeleton. Wearable camera stabilizers work biomechanically by redirecting some or all the weight of the camera down to the user's trunk or waist. This load path bypasses, and thereby reduces musculoskeletal loading on, the shoulders and arms of the user. Wearable camera stabilizers could be considered one of the first exoskeleton-like devices that was widely adopted in society and within a specific industry.
Late 20th Exoskeleton development continued in the 1980s and 1990s, with various devices developed and futuristic concepts conceived. But most exoskeletons of this era were still not commercialized products, rather they were evolving testbeds and exploratory prototypes. Rigid and powered exoskeletons were a major focus during this period, as was the exploration of advanced robotic and control capabilities. A couple notable and representative exoskeletons of this period are summarized below. In the 1980s,
Los Alamos National Laboratory engineers proposed a futuristic exoskeleton called Pitman, a powered exoskeleton suit of armor for military infantry. The design included brain-scanning sensors in the helmet, but was considered too complex and impractical. It was never built. Another 1980s exoskeleton was the Lifesuit, which was a robotic rehabilitation device to help people with paralysis to perform therapy exercises intended to help them regain mobility and learn to walk. Dozens of Lifesuit prototypes were built over the course of multiple decades, highlighting the iterative and evolving nature of exoskeleton technology during this period. Lifesuit was initially tethered but later developed into a portable exoskeleton, which the inventor (an individual with paralysis) used to walk in public road races. However, the inventor also recounted being injured (lacerated) by one of the prototypes during an experimental walking trial. Many other exoskeletons were conceived and developed during this era, leveraging the technological advances of the time to move forward the engineering and technical aspects of exoskeletons. However, real-world and widespread use of exoskeletons were still decades away at the turn of the century. Many of the challenges related to user experience, usability, comfort, and implementation in the real-world were not yet priorities and had still not yet been addressed. These became key focus areas for improvement and advancement in the 21st century.
Early 21st From 2000 to the early 2020's, the focus of the exoskeleton field shifted and expanded, and there were major advances in the design, implementation, and adoption of exoskeletons. However, amongst the general public, there still continues to be many myths and misconceptions about modern exoskeletons—in part due to how exoskeletons have been portrayed in film and science fiction literature. During the early 21st century, the focus on robotic, full-body, human augmentation exoskeletons that drastically alter human performance diminished, and there was a growing trend toward designing smaller, simpler exoskeletons to serve as wearable tools for specific uses and needs. Between 2000 and 2020, there were several high-profile, full-body (or full-lower-body) powered exoskeletons developed to try to significantly increase human strength and performance. These included devices like
TALOS, SARCOS,
BLEEX, and
HULC. Despite some impressive technical capabilities, these devices had a number of major limitations related to bulk, cost, complexity, usability, intent recognition, control, and movement interference. Ultimately, none of these exoskeletons were commercialized. However, several powered medical exoskeletons for people who were paralyzed or with other mobility impairments were successfully developed and commercialized (e.g.,
Rewalk,
Vanderbilt exoskeleton), with RaWalk being the first device receiving FDA approval in 2014. ReWalk was developed by an Israeli company that created one of the world’s first FDA approved robotic exoskeletons for paralyzed patients. Most modern exoskeletons (i.e., devices from about 2020 and onward) are smaller, simpler, and more practical than their predecessors, and differ greatly from most people's preconceptions about exoskeletons. The design focus of exoskeletons during this era was no longer on maximizing power, strength, augmentation, or futuristic capabilities, but instead on solving specific problems, being comfortable and practical to use, and increasing user adoption. This reflected a general recognition and converging evidence within the field that if exoskeletons were going to become more widely adopted, then aspects like comfort, ease of use, cost, simplicity, and practicality were going to be as important, or more important, than aspects like technical specifications, assistance levels, or futuristic capabilities. In many ways, the modern exoskeleton field has deviated from Hollywood narratives and fantasy depictions of exoskeletons, and moved in a different direction. The vast majority of modern exoskeletons are more like wearable tools than like super suits or Hollywood exoskeletons (e.g.,
Iron Man,
Edge of Tomorrow). These wearable tools offer certain benefits but only for limited or specific use cases. For instance, if a person has calf muscle weakness after a stroke, then they might benefit from using an ankle exoskeleton. If a person works overhead on a manufacturing assembly line, then they might benefit from using a shoulder exoskeleton. If a person does material handling in a warehouse or distribution center, they might benefit from using a back exoskeleton. Most exoskeletons are not intended to be worn all-day, every-day, but instead to be used (like most other tools) for specific purposes and during a subset of tasks or activities. Therefore, most modern exoskeleton are designed to support a specific area of the body or subset of tasks, not to augment the entire body or to enhance all movements or activities. There have been several key exoskeleton trends during the early 21st century. Powered exoskeletons became light enough and affordable enough to be usable for some medical, industrial, and recreational purposes. Medical exoskeletons demonstrated sufficient safety to obtain regulatory approval (e.g., FDA approval Passive exoskeletons grew in popularity due to being lighter, more affordable, and less complicated than powered exoskeletons. There was a heightened focus on how to best implement exoskeletons in society, by considering aspects like device fitting, training, educating stakeholders, social acceptance, maintenance, cleaning, financials, and change management. with the expectation that exoskeleton usage will grow into the millions by the 2030s. and established the scientific and clinical foundations related to safety, benefits, and efficacy. Universities and medical centers around the world played a pivotal role in the foundational research and development, followed by a trend towards more large-scale and long-term studies on exoskeletons in industry, clinics, and daily life. There is now considerable academic and industry research along with scientific and longitudinal evidence underlying exoskeleton impacts on rehabilitation, performance enhancement, and injury risk reduction. The early 21st century has also witnessed the emergence of new exoskeleton categories, for instance, recreational, research, and educational exoskeletons. Although some of these devices have been conceptualized for a long time, they only recently began entering the commercial market. In the early 2020's, exoskeleton products to assist walking, running, or hiking also began to emerge. Some recreational exoskeletons are sold directly to consumers, whereas others are sold to businesses such as ski lodges or hiking parks, then provided as a rental option to visitors. As of early 2025, many of these recreational exoskeletons to assist ambulation were still at the pre-product stage or were products that just recently launched into the commercial market. As of 2025, there are over 100 exoskeleton products on the market, which range widely in terms of size, complexity, cost, and other characteristics. Occupational exoskeletons are either implemented as a wearable workplace tool or as an ergonomic control to supplement traditional ergonomic programs or interventions. As with any emerging technology, exoskeletons have witnessed a combination of successes and failures in the early 21st century. However, overall, the exoskeleton market is experiencing robust growth and exoskeletons are gradually becoming more visible and common in society. ==See also==