Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: An Analysis of Ground Mobility Models (ANAMOB)
Authors: Rula, Adam A.
Nuttall, C. J. (Clifford J.)
Mobility and Environmental Systems Laboratory (U.S.)
Keywords: Vehicles, Military
Publisher: U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station
Series/Report no.: Technical Report (U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station);no. M-71-4
Abstract: Practically every research effort and subsequent procurement of materiel for Army use is backed up with a system effectiveness-cost effectiveness study. The development of good ground mobility models in support of these studies was of particular interest to the Office of the Assistant Vice Chief of Staff, U. S. Army, to assist in the construction of new models or in the evaluation of existing models. As a first step, it was highly desirable to survey the existing models. With the need established, and with U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station (WES) interest and technical capabilities in the field, a study aimed at the analysis of existing ground mobility models was initiated by WES and WNRE, Inc., under contract to WES. The objectives of the study were to analyze existing ground mobility models in order to: (a) determine their general level of usefulness and applicability to predicting cross-country performance of ground vehicles in the real world; (b) select the models that appear to be the more promising for this purpose and determine their usefulness and applicability in more definitive terms; (c) point out areas of the latter models in which additional research is needed; and (d) develop guidelines for future development of ground mobility models. Various Army sources and unclassified literature were canvassed for cross-country performance models that have been used or seriously proposed. Examination of these available simulations revealed a considerable degree of fundamental commonality, despite initial differences in appearance. In light of the basic commonality, the available cross-country models were next examined for the single-feature vehicle-terrain interaction models that they utilized. Those single-feature models found in the existing cross-country models were identified. Each cross-country and single-feature model was then examined by a study-term member familiar with the type of problem it dealt with. Each model was briefed, classified, and evaluated on the basis of the degree of objective validation available and of subjective considerations as to adequacy, real-world verisimilitude, probable accuracy, etc. Models covering a given single-feature/vehicle interaction were grouped and the characteristics, assumptions, and limitations that they shared were outlined. When data were available, checks of the prediction accuracy of the single-feature model were made. Details for several classes of single-feature models are presented in two appendixes to the report. Points of divergence were then examined for their significance, and (a) an overall judgment was made as to the most, advanced existing model of the class, and its principal assumptions and limitations were evaluated; (b) modest suggestions were made for immediate improvements, 'as possible; (c) from (a) and' (b), recommendations were formulated for the NOW model; and (d) specific further work to improve the model suggested. In examining each type of model, modeling strategies available were outlined in the broadest sense. This procedure facilitated classification of existing models and indicated the existence of alternatives that might not yet have been explored. In general, the strategies consisted of a number of approaches to each of several segments of the problem and a model was classified the serial path that it represented through a matrix. It was found that, in general, the sequence of a rational path did not include successive steps that proceed from the more specific to the less. The study was conducted within several constraints. Only those Current models for cross-country operation that are functioning and that offer the potential to do a simulation job now were considered. Ten cross-country models meeting; most of these criteria were selected for detailed examination. The study produced a compendium of existing ground mobility submodels and comprehensive cross-country vehicle performance models that have been used or have a potential for future use. A structure for a NOW cross-country ground mobility model is suggested, along with some minor additions that do not require a retreat amount of effort. The study also presents a list of guidelines for the future development of around mobility models alone; with plans for a future research program. This report consists of: n. main text containing an introduction, a presentation an analysis is of single-feature models, a description and analysis of cross country performance models, structure for a NOW comprehensive cross-country model, and guidelines and plans for future development of ground mobility models; and two appendixes that present in detail the soil-vehicle models (Appendix A) and stream-crossing model (Appendix B) examined for this study .
Description: Technical Report
Gov't Doc #: Technical Report M-71-4
Rights: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited
Appears in Collections:Documents

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Technical Report M-71-4.pdf17.83 MBAdobe PDFThumbnail