Mobile robot deployments are expanding in warehouses, but they don’t necessarily eliminate all ergonomic stress. Exoskeletons can help further improve both worker health and productivity, according to HeroWear.
The global market for autonomous mobile robots (AMRs) could expand from $4 billion in 2023 to $10.5 billion by 2028, according to Statista. The increased throughput from automation can put greater strain on associates trying to keep up, noted Nashville-based HeroWear.
“I’ve been in the field of biomechanics and assistive technology for 16 years,” said Karl Zelik, co-founder and chief scientific officer at the company. “We got into this space to try to reduce injuries and pain.”
“Only a few years into this journey, we realized that we could also enhance productivity,” he recalled. “We set out to solve one problem and found secondary benefits.”
Zelik replied to the following questions from Automated Warehouse:
Where exosuits can help warehouse workers
What types and percentage of tasks in logistics could benefit most from exoskeletons?
Zelik: The entire occupational exoskeleton field focuses on systems for physically demanding tasks — bending, lifting, working overhead, and maintaining fixed postures. Many exoskeletons are designed for targeted support of different body parts that suffer injuries, such as the back, legs, hands, and shoulders.
These emerging technologies complement traditional work and automation. Probably 80% are back or arm support, which correlates with U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics figures on musculoskeletal injuries.
Even if we look at just logistics jobs, tasks vary widely. Bending and lifting are extremely common and are impossible to completely eliminate. If I go into a business operation and ask the workers about their pain or fatigue, more than 50% would probably benefit from some intervention.
We’ve seen full-body, rigid exoskeletons as well as more flexible, partial exosuits. What tasks is each best for?
Zelik: There are pros and cons for every kind of device. It’s a matter of matching it to the job and the worker.
Rigid exoskeletons are bulkier and heavier, making them harder to wear for long periods. Soft exosuits are more suitable for tasks requiring people to wear them throughout the day.
With elastic-based systems versus motor-based ones, the latter can also collect data from internal sensors. But there’s a big misconception that elastic, passive systems are less helpful.
Elastic systems often assist as much as or more than active exoskeletons. The limiting factors are more comfort and timing of assistance.
Exoskeletons can collaborate with other robots
How do AMRs increase the need for exoskeletons? How can exoskeletons be used alongside mobile robots, collaborative robot arms, and other warehouse automation?
Zelik: Exoskeletons and automation are both emerging technologies experiencing rapid growth. In the next five years, automation will accelerate demand for exoskeletons. This is based on a few factors.
One, for the foreseeable future, it will be impossible to automate every process in supply chain. Robots allow for faster delivery, but supply chains still involve many people. We have to differentiate between automating individual tasks versus the whole process, from the factory to the front door or from raw materials to the lifespan of products.
Two, increasing automation is leading to more musculoskeletal disorders because of increased throughput. An Amazon study found that robots led to 40% decrease in traumatic or severe injuries but a 70% increase in repetitive-stress injuries.
What has HeroWear learned from the market?
Zelik: There are companies implementing both exosuits and robots. Many of our customers are already heavily automated, and they see them as complementary technologies, not competitors.
One distributor selling automation approached us to also sell our exoskeletons, which was an interesting market signal.
HeroWear addresses exo misconceptions
How have workers reacted to exoskeletons? How much skepticism is there, and how much training is required?
Zelik: People’s reaction is important for any emerging technology. We need buy-in from workers, safety professionals, and organizations.
Five years ago, there a ton of skepticism in the safety and ergonomics community, but that has completely flipped. There’s now a growing body of evidence from academic and field testing that exoskeletons can reduce musculoskeletal disorders.
There’s not nearly as much skepticism, but we still need to increase awareness, as exoskeletons are still widely misunderstood.
What are some of these misconceptions?
Zelik: There are lots of myths and misunderstandings — everything from thinking that exoskeletons will turn users into superhumans to thinking that they will cause muscle atrophy and deconditioning.
There’s also the belief that active devices with motors will provide more assistance than elastic exosuits. Since Sarcos pivoted to software, there are no full-body, rigid exos on the market.
There’s a disconnect between the vision and reality — all commercial exoskeletons are now partial and targeted. Most developers have stopped trying to do everything. We’re listening very closely to end users to design devices that address specific pain points.
Currently and for the foreseeable future, exos will be more like tools for lifting or overhead work than Iron Man.
Safety standards are in development
How much of a need is there for exoskeleton safety standards?
Zelik: We work with different groups. There are already design regulations and general product standards, such as no sharp edges or lead, as well as exoskeleton-specific standards.
We’re involved with ASTM’s F48 committee developing exoskeleton standards. They’re voluntary, and we’re integrating best practices as HeroWear builds its systems.
Do Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) rules also apply?
Zelik: OSHA and NIOSH [the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health] are continuing to get up to speed on exoskeletons. There are no regulations in place, but we’re supporting them in their mission as a long-term priority for the field.
HeroWear designs systems for different tasks, users
You mentioned that systems vary by application. What does HeroWear offer?
Zelik: You need the right tool for the right worker. Apex 2 serves the civilian market, and also have a defense version developed with the U.S. Army. It had to accommodate additional gear like body armor, so it has a different back panel.
Apex is an example of a military device that’s 80% to 90% the same as the civilian version. In warehouses, users want to be seen, but soldiers don’t.
The biomechanical principles are the same, but our devices are optimized depending on the worker — a soldier, a warehouse associate, or a surgeon.
How much customization to the wearer is possible with HeroWear’s systems?
Zelik: Modular design is essential to HeroWear’s products. We wanted to be sure to develop technology for different workers by age, gender, and body type.
Apex 2 offers sizing at the thighs, sleeves, and shoulder straps. I’m not a fan of “one size fits all.” That was a mistake of PPE [personal protective equipment] in the past, which always hurt women.
Customers adopt systems at scale
How many exoskeletons do your customers typically buy? Do you provide them in a robotics-as-a-service (RaaS) model?
Zelik: We have thousands of suits on workers around the globe. Our users range from small companies to the largest logistics providers. GM presented at a recent event, and it has had workers wearing exoskeletons for two years.
We have agricultural workers who have worn them voluntarily for years and longtime users at multiple locations.
The number of exosuits that customers purchase depends on their needs, and it varies widely. We sell packs of 10, 25, and 100 suits. We’ve had individuals buy one suit and some small organizations buy five.
We do offer exosuits as a service for certain types of enterprise customers. When we sell 10 to 25 suits, they come with certain services, including training and guidance on how to implement them.
Do customers need help on justifying exoskeleton expenditures?
Zelik: We have an 80% acceptance rate. We’re at a good price point, but users have alternatives.
Last year, an international grocery chain tested our exosuit. It found that it reduced worker discomfort by 80% and increased cases picked by hour by 8%. Warehouse environments are looking for productivity increases versus the cost of the hardware and services, and we can provide payback in less than five months.
This helps justify the business case, and we’ve gotten smarter about operations, providing an ROI [return-on-investment] calculator to help safety professionals.
Differentiating HeroWear as development continues
What differentiates HeroWear in the market?
Zelik: We have four differentiators: comfort, ease of use, services, and science and evidence.
For comfort, we understood that assistance is table stakes. That’s the easy part, but a lot of our innovations are in components and features for thermal comfort.
We designed Apex to be easy to don and doff and to clean and maintain. Users don’t have to worry about batteries or power.
In services, there’s a level of change management that’s critical for acceptance. We’re not just dialing in the product, but also implementation support, pilot testing, and field studies, and we’re writing warrantees.
For science, we spun out of biomechanics research at Vanderbilt University. HeroWear provides a level of data and ergonomic risk assessments, and we’re first to put out cohesive ROI analysis.
What aspects of exoskeletons still require further development?
Zelik: HeroWear rolled out Apex 2 late last year, and the market reception has been tremendous so far. From Apex 1, we dialed in fit and usability.
Questions now are more around execution, service, and support as early adopters scale. We’re collecting longer-term data to learn about operational impacts and ROI.
There’s still room for improvement in the field for comfort and fit. Exoskeletons are still coming heavily from an engineering and robotics lens, which is often about maximizing technology. We focus as much or more on optimizing the user side.
We’re also looking at active devices. Control and intent recognition are still a challenge – also in prosthetics.
Exoskeltons are optimized for specific use cases, and there are opportunities across the board. The field is young.