2005-01-3556

SAE TECHNICAL
PAPER SERIES

Modeling Vehicle – Terrain Interaction

in Army Simulations
Paul W. Richmond, Burhman Q. Gates and Erwin A. Baylot
U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center

Commercial Vehicle Engineering

Congress and Exhibition
Chicago, Illinois
November 1-3, 2005

400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001 U.S.A. Tel: (724) 776-4841 Fax: (724) 776-5760 Web: www.sae.org
 For permission and licensing requests contact:

SAE Permissions
400 Commonwealth Drive
Warrendale, PA 15096-0001-USA
Email: permissions@sae.org
Tel : 724-772-4028
Fax : 724-776-3036

For multiple print copies contact:

SAE Customer Service

Tel: 877-606-7323 (inside USA and Canada)
Tel: 724-776-4970 (outside USA)
Fax: 724-776-1615
Email: CustomerService@sae.org

ISSN 0148-7191

Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE. The author is solely
responsible for the content of the paper. A process is available by which discussions will be printed with the paper if it is published in
SAE Transactions.

Persons wishing to submit papers to be considered for presentation or publication through SAE should send the manuscript or a 300
word abstract to Secretary, Engineering Meetings Board, SAE.

Printed in USA

Modeling Vehicle – Terrain Interaction in Army Simulations
Paul W. Richmond, Burhman Q. Gates and Erwin A. Baylot
ABSTRACT
Ground vehicle mobility models in U.S. Army entity-level
force-on-force simulations have largely been tailored to
the specific application (e.g., Janus, Close Combat
Tactical Trainer [CCTT], Modular Semi-Automated
Forces [MODSAF], OneSAF Testbed Baseline [OTB]).
The NATO Reference Mobility Model (NRMM) is the
Army standard model for single ground vehicle
performance. However, it is much too complex and is
not designed for use in entity-level simulations. Janus
uses lookup tables based on NRMM speeds, and CCTT
uses forces derived from algorithms internal to NRMM.
The U.S. Army is developing two new entity-level
XXI
simulations: Combat and the One Semi-Automated
Forces Objective System (OOS), which both have
requirements to use NRMM as the basis for their ground
vehicle mobility calculations. The U.S. Army Engineer
Research and Development Center teamed with the
U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command Analysis
Center—White Sands Missile Range to develop a
Standard Mobility Application Programmer Interface
(API) that meets the needs of these new simulations
along with other potential users.
The Standard Mobility API is based on algorithms, data,
and specially designed output files of the NRMM. It
offers the user four levels of resolution, is written in
Java, and makes use of Extensible Markup Language
(XML) for database structures. This paper discusses
those levels of fidelity and specifically examines the
underlying algorithms and their use with specific
emphasis on fidelity degree level 3 and terrain
interaction.
INTRODUCTION
The Standard Mobility (STNDMob) API was developed
as a means of achieving higher fidelity of ground vehicle
movement than was available in legacy force-on-force
simulations (Janus, MODSAF) in evolving U.S. Army
models and simulations (M&S). The ultimate goal is to
develop three independent but related APIs to provide
NRMM-based terrain-limited speed results to aggregate-,
tactical/entity-, and engineering-level models to support
the needs of the M&S community. Figure 1 illustrates the
2005-01-3556
U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center
suite of APIs spanning this hierarchy. Aggregate M&S
generally model ground vehicle movement as units
rather than modeling the movement of individual vehicle
platforms. At the tactical/entity-level, ground vehicles are
modeled as individual entities. At the engineering level,
vehicle dynamics and subsystem components are
modeled. These models will support engineering design,
and the research, development, and acquisition domain
of M&S [1, 2].
Hierarchy
• Aggregate
• Tactical/Entity
o Level 1
ƒ Fidelity Degree 1
ƒ Fidelity Degree 2
o Level 2
ƒ Fidelity Degree 3
ƒ Fidelity Degree 4
• Engineering
Figure 1. Structure of model hierarchy.
As can be seen in Figure 1, there are four degrees of
fidelity for the tactical/entity-level model. This is the
current capability of the STNDMob API. Degrees 1 and 2
are low-resolution models that use preprocessed speed
predictions from the NRMM, and soil trafficability group
joint simulation system (STGJ) codes as terrain input [1,
2]. This paper describes the medium-resolution (Level 2)
mobility representation of vehicle-terrain interaction.
MEDIUM-RESOLUTION REPRESENTATION
The medium-resolution representation (level 2) has two
degrees of fidelity. These are enumerated as 3 and 4.
The fidelity described for degree 3 is much more
complex than fidelity degree 1 and 2 (from Level 1)
because it allows continuous variability of the terrain
state and characteristic attributes of the given
representative vehicle. Fidelity degree 4 is described in
exactly the same manner as degree 3, with the
exception that a specific vehicle is chosen over a
representative vehicle [3]. Fidelity degree 4 is an
improvement (more detailed model) over the Close
Combat Tactical Trainer Semi-Automated Forces
(CCTT-SAF), which uses only representative vehicles [4,
1
5]. This capability will also allow computer-generated http://sedris.org as part of the Environmental Data
force (CGF) models to better serve as analytical tools Coding Standard.
capable of distinguishing mobility performance between
specific vehicles or vehicle designs. VEHICLE DATA

TERRAIN DATA The “calculateMaximumSpeed” method of level 2

For level 2 fidelity, terrain is not categorized; rather,
specific parameters are required. The Appendix contains
the list of terrain data or data derived from terrain and
vehicle location required by the STNDMob version 3.3,
level 2 method “calculateMaximumSpeed.” These terrain
data parameters are shown with the corresponding
OneSAF environmental data model (EDM) feature-
attribute label within the parameter description. The
OneSAF EDM is intended to be SEDRIS-compliant and
complete definitions of these attributes can be found at
obtains vehicle data from a reference to a vehicle index
and plow parameters that are input directly into the
model and are shown in Table 1. Additional vehicle data
are obtained from an XML data file, which is produced
by using a special output file format of the NRMM. There
are four categories of vehicle data: configuration,
dimensional, speed boundaries, and obstacle force data,
and these data are described in Table 2. The method
returns the maximum vehicle-capable speed based on
the algorithms, constraints, and procedures described
below.

Table 1. Vehicle data directly input to “calculateMaximumSpeed.”

An identifier of either a specific vehicle type or vehicle bin, which corresponds to a vehicle XML file
vehicleTypeID
currently supplied with STNDMOB.
The type of plow attached to vehicle, available types:
plowType 0 No plow 1 Track-width mine plow 2 Full-width mine plow
3 Track-width mine rake 4 Full-width mine rake
plowDepth The plowing depth (cm).
plowWeight The mass of the plow (kg), not used in Standard Mobility 3.3.

Table 2. Vehicle data parameters (XML tag names).

Parameter Description or allowable value

Configuration
Type Vehicle type: “Tracked” or “Wheeled.”
Towing_Trailer “Yes” or “No.”
Plow_Blade_Capable “Yes” or “No.”
Power-train power reduction coefficient penalty for using the plow (1.0 = no
Plow_HPcoef
reduction).
Truck, amphibious (or similar design) combat vehicle, heavy equipment
Primary_Use
transporter, or other use.
Mfg_Type The country of origin or manufacturer of the vehicle.
Dimensional_Data
Gross_Weight Gross weight (N) of the vehicle.
Units The number of vehicle units connected (a truck towing a trailer has two units).
Unit_Length The length (inches) of each unit.
Max_Unit_Width The maximum width (inches) of all units.
Unit_Ground_Clearance The minimum ground clearance (inches) of all units.
Push_Bar The maximum push-bar force (lbs) the vehicle can withstand overriding
Force vegetation and the height (inches) from the ground to the center of the push-
Height bar.
Engine_Power Net engine horse power (hp).
A factor that increases the vehicle’s mass based on the inertia of rotating
Rotating_Mass_Factor
components, used in the calculation of vehicle acceleration.
Center_Of_Gravity
The lateral and vertical center of gravity measured from the geometric center of
Lateral
the vehicle and from the ground (inches).
Height
Tipping_Angle The angle (radians) at which a vehicle will tip over in a static position.

2
 Parameter Description or allowable value
The vehicle’s axle length (inches) from the center of the left wheel to the center
Axle_Width
of the right wheel.
AvgTireCorneringStiffness The vehicle’s average tire cornering stiffness (N/deg).
AssemblyWeight The weight (N) on each axle or track assembly.
CenterToCenterTreadWidth The center-to-center distance (m) between tracks or wheels on each assembly.
TrackGroundLength The length of a track on the ground (m).
The number of tires on an axle assembly, normally 2, but 4 for duals, 0 for a
NumTires
tracked assembly.
TireUndeflectedDiameter Undeflected diameter (m) of the tires on each axle.
MinimumTurnRadius Minimum turning radius (m).
The duration (seconds) at which the maximum tire speeds based on inflation
MaxSustainedTireSpeedDuration
pressure were determined (included in Traction Data, see below).
Speed Caps
On Road Maximum on-road speed (kph).
Fording Maximum fording speed (kph).
Swimming Maximum swimming speed (kph).
Ride Limited An array of speed limits based on power absorbed and surfaceRoughness.
UrbanRide Limited An array of speed limits based on power absorbed and UrbanDebris spacing.
Obstacle_Maneuver
Fording_Depth, m The vehicle combination maximum fording depth (m).
Obstacle_Data An array of resistive forces, obstacle heights, approach angles and widths.
An array of obstacle heights and speed limits (based on a 2.5-g vertical
Obstacle_Shock
acceleration limit).
Multiple arrays of traction and resistance data based on throttle position, and
the subsequent tag names. For each of these conditions the traction arrays
contain:
Maximum braking coefficient
Maximum traction coefficient
Traction_Data
Minimum traction coefficient
Maximum tire speed (based on U.S. Army doctrine for tire inflation and
terrain)
Resistive force coefficient
Tractive force–speed curve coefficients
Terrain_Type On-Road, or Off-Road.
Surface Corresponds to SurfaceCondition (see Appendix).
RoadType Superhighway, Primary, or Secondary road
For each of the 5 NRMM soil classes that map to USCS soil types with soil
Soil strengths ranging from a cone index (CI) or rating cone index (RCI) between 5
and 300 (12 values).
Surface Winter conditions.
SnowTraction Ice, ice covered with dry snow, hard-packed snow, and dry snow.
An array of resistance data for snow based on underlying soil cone index, snow
SnowResistance
depth, and snow density.

ALGORITHMS discuss the calculations relating to the tractive force-

Level 2 resembles the mobility implementation in
OneSAF Testbed Baseline-Joint Virtual Battlespace
(OTB-JVB), Objective Force-OneSAF Testbed Baseline
(OF-OTB), Joint Semi-Automated Forces (JointSAF) 5.7,
and CCTT-SAF [4–7]. The implementation considers the
physical interaction between forces and the effects on
the velocity of the vehicle. Additionally, behavioral
factors of the driver are addressed by separating those
speed limits based on driver characteristics from speed
limitations based on terrain interaction. Figure 2 shows a
flow chart of the process. The following subsections
speed curves, resistive forces and speed limits.
TRACTIVE FORCES
The traction–speed relation for the vehicle is determined
from the vehicle’s power train and traction-element
characteristics, soil type, soil strength, and surface
condition. A set of these curves is developed using the
NRMM, which incorporates a representation of a
vehicle’s power train to estimate the vehicle’s theoretical
power in the form of a maximum-available-traction
versus drive-element-speed relation [8]. This model

3
requires performance and configuration characteristics curves are based on the friction coefficients shown in
of the power train including the engine output torque Table 3.
versus speed relation curve, torque converter
characteristics (if applicable), transmission gear ratios Table 3. On-road friction coefficients.
and efficiencies, and final drive information. Optionally,
the theoretical traction-speed relation can be determined Road Surface
through physical testing and provided as an input to Driving Braking
Condition
NRMM. Dry 0.9 0.75
Wet 0.5 0.45

Get the Tractive Force

Thawing Soil
Speed Curve f(Vehicle, Figure 3 illustrates the variation of tractive force required
Modifier
Terrain, surface conditions) to achieve a given speed. These relationships will
change as a function of soil type, soil strength, surface
Road/Soil condition, and throttle setting. These curves are
Thawing soil represented by a hyperbola and eq (1) shows the
∑ Resistive Forces Snow equation as a function of traction coefficient.
Obstacle Additionally, these relations are bounded by maximum
Plowing and minimum traction coefficient values:
Calculate Maximum Speed Gravity
Cornering b0
V = + b1, (1)
(T − b2 )
Estimate Cornering
Resistive Force (Function
where V is the vehicle velocity (mps) and b0, b1, b2 are
of Speed)
curve fit parameters, generated by the NRMM. Sets of
these curves are generated for the range of terrain
surface conditions as described in Table 2 (see the
Calculate Maximum Speed Traction_Data parameter).

50
Calculate Vegetation
and Cornering Speeds 40
Maximum Speed, kph

30
Change in 300 RCI
YES
Cornering Resistance 20
100
is > 0.0005? 80
40
10 30
NO
Ride level
Shock level 0
Calculate Speed Limits Visibility 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Required Traction Coefficient
Tire speed

Return Minimum of Speed Figure 3. Tractive force versus speed for soil type SC and vehicle class
Limits and Maximum Speed 4 (HEMTT, M985).

Frozen and thawing soil due to cold temperatures can

Figure 2. “CalculateMaximumSpeed” flow chart.
The fundamental soil relations in NRMM use an
empirical system that relates vehicle performance to soil
strength in terms of rating cone index (RCI) for cohesive
soils (clays, silts, and wet sands) or a semi-empirical
numeric system relating performance to soil cone index
(CI) for non-cohesive soils (dry sands). Performance on
winter surfaces (ice, snow, packed snow, snow over soft
soil) are also based on empirical algorithms. On-road
influence vehicle traction, and a variety of situations can
exist [9]. If there is a frozen soil layer (indicated by a
thaw depth less than the freeze depth) that is capable of
supporting the vehicle, then the traction on some soil
types is modified by a multiplier, or by changing the
surface condition from normal to slippery (reducing
traction). A detailed flow chart of the process used is
presented by Richmond et al. [11]. Multipliers for traction
are applied to the minimum and maximum traction
coefficients and the curve fit parameters in eq (1).

4
The traction coefficient relates directly to the vehicle’s
ability to climb slopes, override vegetation, and negotiate
obstacles. The traction coefficient is defined as the
required traction force divided by vehicle weight:
T =
∑F , i
(2)
W
where T is the tractive force coefficient required to move
the vehicle, given the sum of the external resisting
forces (Fi), and the gross vehicle weight (W). Thus
higher tractive-force values indicate difficulty in
movement.
RESISTIVE FORCES
Various vehicle mobility impediments in the form of
resistances are determined. The sum of all impeding
resistances is compared with the traction-speed relation.
If the traction exceeds the resistance force sum, excess
vehicle traction is available and a suitable running speed
is determined using eq (1) and (2). Otherwise, if resisting
forces are greater than the available traction, vehicle
immobilization (maximum speed = 0) results.
The forces considered in this section encompass
resistances due to soil interaction/surface friction, snow,
and gravity. Adhesion to surfaces is greatly affected by
the contact area of the tire (sensitive to inflation
pressure) or track, surface material, and conditions of
the surface. Thus, the resulting resistance forces can
vary widely.
Soil and road surface resistance
There are empirical methods for computing terrain
resistance (FSOIL) as a function of soil type, road type,
snow, ice, vehicle traction element (wheel/track), etc.
These methods are found in the NRMM User’s Guide [8]
with specific updates for snow, ice, and frozen soils
found in [9, 10]. NRMM holds the value of FSOIL constant
with speed although it tends to increase as the speed of
the vehicle increases [12, 13, and 14]. Since cross-
country speeds are typically a great deal less than on-
road speeds, this is an appropriate assumption for the
level of fidelity discussed here. Formulas for computing
the hydrodynamic drag and aerodynamic drag
resistance forces are found in [8], but have not yet been
fully implemented in STNDMob. Currently,
hydrodynamic-resistance is combined with other effects
to generate maximum speeds for fording and swimming
based on the validated NRMM vehicle file. The on-road
traction-speed relations have the aerodynamic drag
resistance embedded in them; this effect is not yet
included in the off-road or snow resistance relations.
Table 4 shows the on-road resistance coefficients for
wheeled and tracked vehicles. For soils, the values are
dependant on vehicle parameters, soil type, and soil
strength.
Table 4. On-Road resistance coefficients.
Road Surface
Wheeled Tracked
Condition
Dry 0.0200 0.05617
Wet 0.0194 0.05617
Resistance can also be influenced by frozen/thawing soil
winter conditions, and, as discussed above, if there is a
thawed layer. As with traction, resistance on some soil
types is also modified by a multiplier [11].
Snow resistance
The resistance due to a snow cover (FSNOW) is a function
of vehicle tire or track parameters, snow depth, snow
density, and the underlying soil strength. Snow
resistance is calculated by the NRMM, using methods
described by [15, 16] and stored in the vehicle files as
indicated in Table 2.
If the snow density is less than 0.55 Mg/m3, STNDMob
does a lookup and interpolation (if necessary) of this
resistance data. If the density of the snow is greater than
0.55 Mg/m3, it uses the resistive coefficient stored with
the hard-packed snow traction.
Obstacle forces
At present, obstacles other than vegetation are assumed
to be non-deformable and two-dimensional. Figure A-1
in the Appendix shows obstacle geometry and describes
the parameters. NRMM uses preprocessed data from
other models such as the NRMM obstacle module
(OBSMOD) or NRMM vehicle dynamics module
(VEHDYN) to determine whether a vehicle can traverse
an obstacle based on a static force balance [17]. The
obstacle geometry is assumed to be a trapezoid defined
by the approach (ingress/egress) angle, height, and
width. The interaction between the vehicle and obstacle
geometries is ultimately reduced to the clearance of a
vehicle over the obstacle. A zero or negative value of
clearance in the data indicates a “NOGO” condition and,
thus, the model would predict that the vehicle could not
traverse the obstacle without deformation.
For the case where the minimum clearance is greater
than zero, a linear, multidimensional interpolation is
performed on the generalized trapezoidal shapes found
in the vehicle data. The maximum required tractive
force, FOBSMAX, required to traverse the obstacle and the
average resistance force, FOBS, are computed.
Plowing force
The STNDMob uses a data table to interpolate the
plowing force resistance, FPLOW, from a multidimensional
array of plow depths, soil strengths, and soil groups.
These tables are provided for the plow types shown in
5
Table 1. In the final sum of forces equation, this force is RESISTANCE FORCES AND SPEED LIMITS
treated simply as an additional resistance. ASSOCIATED WITH MANUEVER

Sum of longitudinal resistive forces
and gravitational effect
Resistive forces discussed thus far have dealt with
forces that impede the movement of the vehicle at the
traction element. For steady-state conditions and no
other forces present, their sum must equal the traction
(F) that can be generated on a level surface:
F = FSOIL + FSNOW .
Since the traction and resistance force data generated
by NRMM were for level surfaces and act only along this
vector component, the forces must be resolved to the
vector component parallel to the grade. Thus,
F cos θ = ( FSNOW + FSOIL ) cos θ + W sinθ ,
where Θ is the slope (vehicle pitch or grade)
F = FT + FR + W tanθ .
Dividing by the vehicle weight to put this equation in
coefficient form yields
( FSOIL + FSNOW )
TRESISTANCE = + tanθ .
W
The STNDMob API level 2 fidelity was not intended to
model all aspects of vehicle dynamics, but to capture the
effects of vehicle performance and terrain interaction to
the extent that, in a computer-generated force (CGF)
application, vehicle behaviors need only be represented
to the point where an analyst or user does not observe
unrealistic behavior.
Table 5 indicates which terrain effects can be easily
(3) modeled in two dimensions and within a CGF. Studying
the issue from another perspective, speeds on a curve
or in a turning maneuver can be controlled primarily by
traction (slide/spin or overshoot) or by the vehicle
suspension (rollover).
The NRMM produces estimates of both velocity- and
non-velocity-dependent resistances to motion due to
(4)
vehicle cornering, along with absolute speed limits, and
combines these with potential vehicle performance to
estimate a maximum vehicle-capable speed for a given
set of terrain conditions. Much of the following is
(5) extracted directly from [8] and the NRMM source code.
The resulting effects-associated algorithms and
applications associated with vehicle performance during
a turn are described below. For cornering and side slope
effects, NRMM considers three terrain conditions:
(6) 1. Roads (superhighway, primary, and secondary
roads).
2. Trails (deformable soil surfaces).
3. Cross-country (deformable soil surfaces).

Table 5. Description of effects to be modeled during a turning maneuver for a CGF vehicle.

Effect Description or Example Important parameters1

Lateral force, super-elevation, weight
distribution, wheelbase, radius of
Limit speed on a
“Spin out,” rollover. curvature or planned path, current
curve.
heading, tire cornering stiffness,
suspension.
Steering angle and How fast can the vehicle react to a change in steering Slip angle, velocity, cornering
yaw velocity. angle or react to an ordered change in heading. stiffness.
Limit/reduce speed Given that a future maneuver requires a lower speed,
Route plan, radius of curvature,
due to maneuver some method is required to determine the deceleration
current speed.
anticipation. as that maneuver location is approached.
Induced resistance in Longitudinal component of cornering force; [18] gives
Cornering stiffness, radius of
the longitudinal an example of 20% power requirement to overcome
curvature, super-elevation
direction. this resistive force.
1
Surface type, grade, and other parameters associated with straight-line movement are assumed.

6
Additionally, wheeled and tracked vehicles or vehicles ⎡ gRφ ⎤
2

that have both wheel and track elements are treated
differently. For roads and trails, radius of curvature and
super-elevation are inputs; for cross-country, a radius of
curvature is calculated based on vegetation stem
spacing (for each vegetation class). The assumption is
that the only reason to turn on cross-country terrain is
related to vegetation avoidance. In the STNDMob
implementation, it is assumed that for off-road
maneuver, a radius of curvature is calculated from the
planned vehicle path.
Cornering forces are generally velocity-dependent and
are used to adjust the tractive force-speed curve, while
stability effects are represented as speed limits (in the
NRMM). Calculations are generally made on a traction
element (axle) basis and summed over traction
elements, differentiating between powered and non-
powered elements when necessary.
E = ⎢1 − 2 ⎥ , (8)
⎣ V ⎦
where
Φ = road super-elevation angle (radians)
g = acceleration of gravity.
Tracked vehicles on roads and trails
Lateral forces associated with steering tracked
suspension elements are computed as a longitudinal
resistance component. This resistance is given by the
Merritt equation [20–22] in terms of the vehicle width-to-
length ratio. For an individual traction element (or track
“set”) i, the “Merritt constant” is calculated as
Mki = a0 + a1Ai + a2 Ai2 + a3 Ai3 , (9)

Wheeled vehicle cornering resistances where

Ai = center-to-center distance between tracks
a0 = 1.0624
Longitudinal resistance during cornering is induced by
a1 = –0.6999
lateral forces and summed over the wheel elements
a2 = 0.051848
(axles) of wheeled or partially wheeled vehicles (e.g.,
a3 = 0.05488
half-tracks). The longitudinal cornering resistance (FCC)
is originally from Smith [19]:
and, a “radius factor” (Ki) is derived as
2
V m
∑ 2π R
K i = Mki ⎡⎣a0 + a1R + a2 R 2 + a3 R 3 ⎤⎦ , (10)
FCC = , (7)
⎛ µ ⎞
180nfc ⎜ ⎟ where
⎝ 0.75 ⎠
R = radius of curvature of road in feet
a0 = 1.18
where a1 = –9.0895 × 10–3
V = tangential velocity of the vehicle a2 = 3.779 × 10–5
m = mass of the vehicle supported by an element a3 = –6.70476 × 10–8.
R = radius of curvature to the center of gravity of the
vehicle Additionally, the radius of curvature should be less than
n = number of tires on the element 92 m for tracked vehicles because Ki can become
f = empirical correlation coefficient (0.96) negative, thus
c = average cornering stiffness (lbf/deg)1
µ = maximum friction coefficient for current terrain.
K i = max(K i ,0.0). (11)
Interestingly, Smith [19] suggests eq (17) as an
approximation, with µ an empirical constant with a value Furthermore, the summation is over the total number of
of 0.2 based on limited testing. It was implemented in tracked assemblies; thus the turning resistance for
the NRMM as the traction coefficient of the current tracked vehicles is calculated by
terrain, implying that the equation is not being used as
originally intended. It may be possible to derive a similar FCT = µ ∑ K i Wi , (12)
equation based on an expanded bicycle model, but this
has yet to be investigated. where
µ = surface traction coefficient
A correction (multiplier) to the cornering resistance for Wi = weight on the ith tracked assembly (lb).
super elevation is

Speed limited by sliding

1
When English units are specified, it is because of the
empirical nature of the equation. Most algorithms in
STNDMob use SI units.
Speed limited by sliding is the speed at which the
centrifugal force of the vehicle in the curve is balanced
by the contact friction force, as follows:
7
 ⎡ µ + tan φ ⎤
1/ 2
VSliding = ⎢Rg . (13)
⎣ 1 − µ tan φ ⎥⎦
Speed limited by tipping
The speed at which a vehicle will tip over is obtained
from the equation expressing the equilibrium of
moments around the outer tire (or track) and the
pavement contact point. The forces involved are the
centrifugal force and the weight of the vehicle. Thus, the
tipping velocity can be determined by
1/ 2
⎡ Wtmax + Ycg tan φ ⎤
VTipping = ⎢Rg ⎥ , (14)
⎣⎢ Ycg − Wtmax tan φ ⎦⎥
where Wtmax is the controlling lateral distance to the
center of gravity (the smallest of 1/2 the distance
between wheel centers over all axles) and Ycg is the
height of the center of gravity, corrected for tire inflation.
Maximum speed on curves
The maximum speeds of wheeled vehicles on curves
are based on relations derived from criteria used by the
American Association of State Highway Officials [23]
(AASHO is now called the American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials, AASHTO). The
implementation is explained in [9] and basically the
approach estimates a lateral friction coefficient based on
the AASHTO ratio and NRMM-predicted longitudinal
force. The following equations are solved iteratively, by
comparing the input radius of curvature to that produced
by eq (15):
V2
R= . (15)
14.95(f + tan φ )
This empirical equation will yield the maximum safe
speed V, for a given radius R (ft). The AASHTO friction
coefficient f is a function of speed (V). Calculation of f is
accomplished using eq (16–20). First the AASHTO
coefficient of lateral friction is determined from
fAS = 0.678 − 0.00468V . (16)
Next, using a straight-line fit of the AASHTO coefficient
of longitudinal friction for dry pavements obtained from a
variety of stopping tests, the AASHTO longitudinal
friction coefficient (fAL) is determined by:
fAL = 0.670 − 0.00174V . (17)
The ratio of the side friction to longitudinal friction for a
given speed is used as a factor to convert the actual
NRMM-predicted coefficient to an equivalent side
friction. The following equation is used to determine the
side friction coefficient for curvature speed predictions
(fPS) as a function of speed and NRMM-predicted
longitudinal friction coefficient (fPL):
fAS
fPS = fPL , (18)
fAL
where fPS is the side friction coefficient and fPL is the
NRMM-computed longitudinal friction coefficient.
To facilitate obtaining the AASHTO-recommended side
friction coefficients (fA), the following curve was obtained
by fitting the data points to a hyperbola. For speeds <20
mph, the value for 20 mph (0.21) is used. The following
equation yields the side friction coefficient:
1
fA = V ≥ 20
3.264 + 0.07648V (19)
= 0.21 V < 20.
This next relation determines the value of f and includes
a “safety factor,” S, which is related to the AASHTO-
recommended design coefficient (fA) by setting the
safety factor, S, to a value of 1.0 and to the maximum
side coefficient (fPS) by setting it to a value of 0.0 or
anywhere in between as a compromise. The following
equation yields the final friction coefficient:
f = (fA − fPS )S + fPS . (20)
In the implementation, the maximum AASHTO-
recommended coefficient of friction is not allowed to
exceed the model prediction for longitudinal traction. The
scheme used for hard surfaces was arbitrarily applied to
the soft soils (trails) and snow-covered roads and trails.
The AASHTO reference provides very little information
concerning the friction coefficients for wet pavements.
The implications are that the longitudinal friction
coefficients are usually much less than those for dry
pavements. The AASHTO design criterion used is the
same since it is assumed to apply to an arbitrarily poor
condition. Therefore, the same friction reduction scheme
used for dry pavements was assumed to apply to wet
pavements. Note that, for the NRMM implementation,
the AASHTO information regarding coefficients of friction
on dry pavements is used only to determine the ratio of
longitudinal to lateral friction; the actual longitudinal
friction is obtained from other relations in the NRMM
model. Figure 4 illustrates this algorithm, and compares
it to the “bicycle” model approximation of two high-
mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles (HMMWVs) in a
steady-state turn of radius 132 m. Based on this
analysis, the STNDMob implementation uses a value of
0.5 for S. The final cornering speed limit is the minimum
of VSliding, VTipping, and the AASHTO speed.
Vegetation-limited speed
The STNDMob computes the effects of driving through
vegetation (trees and shrubs) by determining the
8
where W is the vehicle weight, and Table 6. Driver behavior limits,
with the default values shown in parentheses.
TTL = max(TTL ,TMIN ), (27)
Parameter and default Description
where TMIN is the minimum required traction to move the value
vehicle (from the vehicle data file) and if RoughnessComfort (6) The amount of sustained
power absorbed (watts) that
FOBSMAX the driver will tolerate.
TTL > TMAX or > TMAX , (28) ShockComfort (2.5) The maximum vertical
W acceleration (g’s) the driver will
tolerate.
where TMAX is the maximum available traction (from the ThrottleSetting (100%) Percent throttle used for
vehicle data file), the vehicle/terrain-controlled speed determining speed.
(VTERRAIN ) is 0; otherwise, eq (1) is used to calculate V
Duration (28800.0) The time (s) that the vehicle
and the maximum vehicle/terrain-controlled speed is
can be driven at a speed
greater than the maximum tire
VTERRAIN = min(VCornering , VVEG , V ). (29) speed
RecognitionDistance The distance (m) used to
BEHAVIORAL MODEL (100) estimate stopping distance;
this distance is the lower of the
Vehicle behavior should not be limited to what “should atmospheric visibility or
be done,” but rather what the driver, be it human or distance to an object in the
autonomous, directs the vehicle to do. The physical vehicle’s path.
model should report to the behavioral model that sliding DecelerationRate (2) The maximum deceleration
or tipping is about to occur, so that the decision can be (g’s) the driver will tolerate.
made in the next time period whether to change the BrakePosition (90) The percent of braking force
settings for throttle, steering, and braking. Some of these the driver will use.
speed boundaries were introduced in the previous ReactionTime (0.75) Reaction time related to a
sections regarding tipping and sliding. It is a source of decision to apply brakes.
debate whether AASHTO-recommended settings are a MinVegetationSpeed The minimum speed at which
physical or behavioral boundary. STNDMob contains a (1.8) vegetation will be overridden.
“driver class” that allows setting a number of values
normally attributed to a human’s decision process during
vehicle operation as described in Table 6. Ultimately Speed constraints on a vehicle due to a driver’s
these parameters are all represented by a speed limit. recognition distance (visibility) are based on stopping
The following behavior-based speed limits are distance. The standard method for measuring visibility in
implemented in STNDMob 3.3: vegetation is based on a 0.3-m star placed 0.3 m above
the ground. The driver must recognize at least two
1. Visibility-Limited Speed points on the star. For on-road purposes, the visibility is
2. Shock-Limited Speed based on the recognition distance for a small object in
3. Ride-Limited Speed the road.
4. Urban-Ride Limited Speed
5. Tire Speed A CGF vehicle entity needs to be able to slow down in
time to maneuver around an obstacle or in order to
VISIBILITY-LIMITED SPEED maneuver around a turn. Looking ahead based on a
projected path is required along with estimates of a
Vehicle-predicted speed due to visibility conditions is vehicle entity’s braking and turning ability. The percent
driver-dependent. Visibility inputs are expected to come braking used can be set in the driver behavior limits.
from three sources. The atmosphere will provide an STNDMob sets the visibility speed limit using
attribute-defining visibility as correlated to obscurants
such as fog or smoke near the ground. The terrain will VVIS = −aTR + a 2TR2 + 2aS , (30)
provide attribution-defining visibility as controlled by the
vegetation. There will be a line-of-sight based on
elevation contours and road curvature. The minimum of where TR is the reaction time, S is the visibility distance,
these three attributes is the value input for mobility and a is the available deceleration.
modeling purposes.
⎛ BrakePosition ⎞
a = g (TMAX + TTL ) ⎜ ⎟. (31)
⎝ 100 ⎠

10
TMAX and TTL are the maximum traction coefficient and at a given height. STNDMob provides this as a lookup
total traction resistance defined earlier. table as a function of obstacle height and speed.

RIDE-LIMITED SPEEDS TIRE LIMITED SPEEDS

In consideration of the amount of absorbed power due to
natural terrain surface roughness the driver/equipment is
willing to endure over a given amount of time, a “ride”
speed, VRIDE, is set. This limit is usually about 8 hours for
6 Watts of absorbed power by the driver/equipment.
STNDMob obtains this speed from a lookup table in the
vehicle data, as a function of surface roughness.
Urban Ride-limited speed VURBAN is also a lookup. Here,
however, the roughness is caused by rubble or debris
from buildings subjected to weapons effects.
SHOCK-LIMITED SPEEDS
Similarly, STNDMob considers the amount of shock that
a driver or equipment can or is willing to sustain when
encountering an obstacle. The impact of the vehicle’s
traction element and the obstacle varies and usually
increases as the height of the obstacle increases. Thus,
the impact speed, VOBS, will decrease as the height of
the obstacle increases and will eventually become zero
For safe tire operation, STNDMob provides “limits” on
speed VTIRE, which correspond to tire design and
deflection (inflation pressure). Reduced tire inflation
enhances off-road mobility and its use is implied in
development parameters used in eq (1). Using reduced
inflation pressure in off-road conditions is accepted U.S.
Army doctrine, and on some vehicles, a central tire
inflation system is available. The maximum safe tire
speed, VTIRE, is applied only if the vehicle is to be
operated for extended periods of time at reduced
deflections, in which case a speed limit is assigned by
deflection category to ensure tire protection. This
duration value is maintained/updated outside of the
STNDMob code.
After consideration of both terrain-limited speed and
driver-behavior-limited speed, the predicted maximum
speed is
V = min(VVIS , VTIRE , VRIDE , VOBS , VURBAN , VTERRAIN ). (32)

Table 7. STNDMob speed predictions for the High-Mobility Tracked Vehicle class (M1A1)
compared with a fidelity degree level 4 vehicle data file (T72 tank).

Soil Soil Vegetation Surface Speed Speed

Surface Obstacle
Type Strength Avg Roughness Slope % M1A1 T72
Condition Height, m
(USCS) (RCI/CI) Spacing, m (RMS), m. kph kph
SM 300 Dry 0 0 0 0 63.6 50.7
SM 300 Dry 0 0 0 10 28.3 25.7
SM 300 Dry 0 0 0 40 6.6 4.7
SM 50 Dry 0 0 0 0 35.2 31.7
SM 50 Dry 0 0 0 10 19.8 17.9
SM 50 Dry 0 0 0 40 2.8 1.7
SM 50 Slippery 0 0 0 40 4.5 2.4
SM 100 Snow 0 0 0 0 53.6 44.3
SM 100 Snow 0 0 0 20 11.7 10.1
SM 300 Dry 0.61 0 0 0 40.7 0.0
SM 300 Dry 0 6.1 0 0 44.7 32.8
SM 300 Dry 0 0 0.76 0 21.4 19.3
SP 300 Dry 0 0 0 0 65.5 57.1
SP 300 Dry 0 0 0 10 30.3 27.0
SP 300 Dry 0 0 0 40 0.0 0.0
Note: All terrain attributes as defined in the input data section are not given in this example.

EXAMPLE OUTPUT
Table 7 provides an example of STNMOB speed
predictions for two vehicles. A high-mobility tracked
vehicle (M1A1) is used as the representative vehicle.
Recall that Level 2, Fidelity 3, uses the representative
vehicle to serve effectively as a substitute for the speed
prediction of a specific vehicle, whereas Fidelity 4 uses
the actual vehicle data file for a specific vehicle. The last
column of Table 7 presents the speeds predicted using a
T-72 vehicle file.
SUMMARY
Mobility is a key performance parameter that must be
represented accurately and consistently within and
11
across military M&S to produce valid interactions and
support conclusions for decision-makers regarding
system performance, force design, tactics, and doctrine.
The detail required to represent ground vehicle mobility
varies with the study level (engineering level versus
tactical versus operational) and with the goal of the
simulation (e.g., training versus analysis).
Models of vehicle–terrain interaction are still primarily
empirical, based on research that occurred as far back
as the 1950s but which has been continually improved
upon. The basic NRMM initially developed in the early
1970s continues to be the primary source of analysis of
vehicle terrain interaction by the U.S. Army and some
NATO countries.
This paper shows how the NRMM could be used as the
basis for estimating vehicle terrain interaction in the next
generation of U.S. Army models and simulations, used
for training, analysis, and research.
REFERENCES
1. Baylot, A.E., N.C. Goerger, B. Gates, and S.R.
Goerger (2003) Getting One of the Basics Right for
Distributed Simulations: A Mobility Service/Server
for the Present and Future, Fall Simulation
Interoperability Workshop, Paper Number 03F-SIW-
123, Orlando, FL.
2. Baylot, E.A., B.Q. Gates, J.G. Green, P.W.
Richmond, N.C. Goerger, G.L. Mason, C.L.
Cummins, and L.S. Bunch (2005) Standard for
Ground Vehicle Mobility. ERDC/GSL TR-05-06, U.S.
Army Engineer Research and Development Center,
Vicksburg, MS.
3. Baylot, E.A., and B.Q. Gates (2002) Procedure for
categorizing ground vehicles. ERDC/GSL TR-02-21,
U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development
Center, Vicksburg, MS.
4. U.S. Army (1996) CCTT dynamic behavior, design
synthesis report. PEO-STRI, Orlando, FL.
5. U.S. Army (1996) Compendium of CCTT algorithms,
data, data structures and generic system mappings.
PEO-STRI, Orlando, FL.
6. Joint Precision Strike Demonstration (JPSD)
Program Office (2002) System detailed description
for the Joint Virtual Battlespace (JVB). Fort Belvoir,
VA.
7. Mason, G.L., R.B. Ahlvin, and J.G. Green (2001)
Short-term operational forecasts of trafficability.
ERDC/GSL TR-01-22, U.S. Army Engineer
Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS.
8. Ahlvin, R.B., and P.W. Haley (1992) NATO
Reference Mobility Model, Edition II; NRMM user’s
guide. Technical Report GL-92-19, U.S. Army
Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
9. Ahlvin, R.B. (in prep.) NRMM Edition II, User’s
Guide Addendum. U.S. Army Engineer Research
and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS.
10. Ahlvin, R.B., and S.A. Shoop (1995) Methodology
for Predicting for Winter Conditions in the NATO
Reference Mobility Model. Proceedings of the 5th
North American International Society for Terrain
Vehicle Systems Conference, Saskatoon, SK,
Canada.
11. Richmond, P.W., R.A. Jones, D.C. Creighton, and
R.B. Ahlvin (2004) Estimating Off-road Ground
Contact Forces for a Real Time Motion Simulator.
SAE 2004-01-2643. Also in SAE Special Publication
on Advancements in Air Brake Systems, Truck
Suspensions & Military Vehicle/Terrain Interface,
SP-1095.
12. Taborek, J.J. (1957) Mechanics of vehicles. Parts 1–
13. Machine Design, Cleveland, OH.
13. Coutermarsh, B. (2003) Vehicle Rolling Resistance
Measurements in Sand and Snow. Proceedings of
th
the 9 European Conference of the ISTVS, Harper
Adams, UK, Sep 2003.
14. Selig, E.T., and C. Wang (1975) Effect of Velocity on
Drag and Sinkage of Free-Rolling Tires on Soil.
Proceedings of the 5th International Conference of
the ISTVS, Vol II, Hoboken, NJ.
15. Richmond, P.W., S.A. Shoop, and G.L. Blaisdell
(1995) Cold regions mobility models. U.S. Army
Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory
CR 95-1, Hanover, NH.
16. Richmond, P.W. (1995) Motion resistance of
wheeled vehicles in snow. U.S. Army Cold Regions
Research and Engineering Laboratory, CR 95-7,
Hanover, NH.
17. Creighton, D.C. (1986) Revised vehicle dynamics
module: User’s guide for computer program
VEHDYN II, Technical Report SL-86-9, U.S. Army
Engineer Research and Development Center,
Vicksburg, MS.
18. Milliken, W.F., and Milliken, D.L. (1995) Race car
vehicle dynamics. ISBN 1-56091-526-9. SAE
International, Warrendale, PA.
19. Smith, G.L. (1970) Commercial vehicle performance
and fuel economy. SP-355, The Society of
Automotive Engineers, New York, NY.
20. Merritt, H.E. (1946) “The evolution of a tank
transmission,” Proceedings, Institution of Mechanical
Engineers 154, 412. Institution of Mechanical
Engineers, London, UK.
21. Ray, J.R. (1979) “Investigation of the factors
involved in steering tracklaying vehicles,” Technical
Report No. 10969 (AD871157), U.S. Army Tank-
Automotive Command, Warren, MI.
22. Peters, J. (1995) Analysis of soil–track interaction for
computer program TVSTEER. Technical Report GL-
95-6, U.S. Army Engineer Research and
Development Center, Vicksburg, MS.
23. American Association of State Highway Officials
(AASHO) (1966) A policy on geometric design of
rural highways, 1965, Washington, DC.
24. Rula A.A., and C.J. Nuttall, Jr. (1971) An Analysis of
Ground Mobility Models (ANAMOB). U.S. Army
12
 Waterways Experiment Station, Technical Report M-
71-4, Vicksburg, MS
CONTACT
Inquiries regarding this paper should be addressed to
Dr. Paul W. Richmond, ERDC-GSL, 3909 Halls Ferry
Rd., Vicksburg, MS 39180. Phone: 601 634 2689,
Paul.W.Richmond@erdc.usace.army.mil
DEFINITIONS, ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS
API: Application programmers interface
CCTT: Close Combat Tactical Trainer
CombatXXI: Combined Arms Analysis Tool for the XXIst
Century
EDCS: Environmental Data Coding Standard
Janus: Platoon through Brigade Land Combat Model
with Limited Air & Naval Functionality. Primarily
sponsored by TRADOC
JointSAF 5.7: Joint Semi Automated Forces version 5.7
JSIMS: Joint Simulation System
MODSAF: Modular Semi Automated Forces (OTB was
based on this model, as was JointSAF.
NRMM: NATO Reference Mobility Model
OBSMOD: Obstacle Module
OF-OTB: Objective force OTB
OOS: One Semi Automated Forces Objective System
OTB: OneSAF Testbed baseline http://onesaf.org/
OTB-JVB: OTB – Joint Virtual Battlespace
SEDRIS: An infrastructure technology that enables
information technology applications to express,
understand, share, and reuse environmental data
http://sedris.org/index.htm.
STGJ: Soil Trafficability Group JSIMS
VEHDYN: Vehicle Dynamics Module
13
 APPENDIX

Table A1. Terrain parameters used by the STNDMob level 2 to calculate maximum vehicle speed.

Terrain Parameter Description

Vehicle pitch angle (radians) should be calculated outside of STNDMob; based on
vehiclePitch vehicle location and heading (effectively the terrain slope); a vehicle traveling up hill
will have a positive pitch angle.
Vehicle roll angle (radians) should be calculated outside of STNDMOB, based on
vehicle location and heading; vehicle roll is the angle perpendicular to the vehicle
vehicleRoll
pitch. If the OneSAF feature is a road, there will be a SUPERELEVATION attribute,
which should be used for this value.
The USCS soil type, OneSAF attribute: SOIL_TYPE, as an integer, mappings are
shown below:
soilUSCSType 1 GW 2 GP 3 GM 4 GC 5 SW 6 SP 7 SM 8 SC
9 ML 10 CL 11 OL 12 CH 13 MH 14 OH 15 PT
17 ML_AND_CL 18 EVAPORITES 19 rock 20 water
The soil cone index down to 40 cm; SoilStrengthCone_40 is the average of the
soilStrengthCone_40 OneSAF attribute: SOIL_CONE_INDEX_QB_MEASUREMENT_DEPTH at
measurement depths of 15 and 30 centimeters.
The condition of frozen water on the terrain surface corresponds to the
OneSAF attribute: FROZEN_WATER_TYPE; the enumerations are
0 ICE 1 MELTING_SNOW_OR_ICE
FROZEN_WATER_TYPE
2 MIXED_SNOW_AND_ICE 3 NONE_PRESENT
4 SLUSH 5 SNOW
6 SNOW_OVER_ICE
Used to determine if the surface is a type of road; use the OneSAF attribute:
TERRAIN_ROUTE_TYPE; the enumerations are
0 Use when the feature does not have this attribute (off-road)
surfaceType 1 SUPERHIGHWAY
2 PRIMARY_ROAD
3 SECONDARY_ROAD
4 TRAIL
Whether surface is wet or dry; corresponds to the OneSAF attribute:
SURFACE_SLIPPERY; examples: wet grass and wet clay soil; the origin of
surfaceCondition this parameter is the NRMM and the attempt to model the immediate effects
of a heavy rainfall on traction. Dry = 1= SURFACE_SLIPPERY is false, Wet
= 2 SURFACE_SLIPPERY is true.
The average spacing (ft) of pieces of debris or possibly small rubble piles in a debris
field. This value should come from the Structural Weapons Effects (SWE) API.
debrisSpacing Expected values are in the range of 0–6 feet. Although not currently in the OOS
EDM, they could be an attribute of “RUBBLE AREA,” “RUBBLE POINT,” and
possibly other features. Use zero for no effect.
The RMS roughness (inches) of the debris field. Similar to the EDCS attribute:
TERRAIN_ROUGHNESS_ROOT_MEAN_SQUARE: The roughness of
<TERRAIN>1 based on elevation variations in the debris field, calculated using the
debrisRoughness
root-mean-square (RMS) value of the detrended<<TERRAIN_ELEVATION>>. This
value should come from the SWE API. Expected values are in the range of 0.0–5.0
inches. Use zero for no effect.

14
 Terrain Parameter Description
The EDCS attribute: TERRAIN_ROUGHNESS_ROOT_MEAN_SQUARE: The
roughness of <TERRAIN> based on elevation variations, calculated using the root-
surfaceRoughness mean-square (RMS) value of the detrended<<TERRAIN_ELEVATION>>s measured
at a spatial frequency of approximately 0.3 meters. If the feature does not have a
TERRAIN_ROUGHNESS_ROOT_MEAN_SQUARE attribute, set to zero.
The depth (cm) of the snow cover; there are two EDCS attributes that describe snow
depth:
SNOW_DEPTH: The depth of <SNOW> and/or <ICE> on the <TERRAIN>.
snowDepth SNOW_ONLY_DEPTH: The depth of the <SNOW>, which may be over
<TERRAIN>, <ICE>, or floating <ICE>.
For version 3.3 use SNOW_ONLY_DEPTH; future Standard Mobility
enhancements for crossing ice-covered water bodies will need both values.
The average density of the snow cover (g/cm3); the OneSAF attribute:
snowDensity
SNOW_DENSITY.
The soil moisture content by volume (%); use the EDCS attribute
SOIL_WATER_VOLUME: The <WATER> lost from the <SOIL> upon drying to
soilMoisture
constant mass at 105 degrees Celsius, expressed as the fractional volume of
<WATER> per unit bulk volume of wet <SOIL>. Multiplied by 100.
The expected input is the EDCS attribute SOIL_WETNESS: The categorical (coded)
<SOIL> <WATER> content, whether liquid or solid, for the feature. The OOS EDM
enumerations and description are shown:

Potential Depth to Water Depth of Wetting General Integer

Enumerations
Wetness Table Characteristics of Sites Values

Less than 1 ft, located in

Arid Indeterminable 0
desert regions
PERENNIALLY_DRY
1–4 ft, steeply sloping
Dry Indeterminable denuded or severely 1
eroded and gullied.
More than 4 ft, well-
drained soil with no
restricting layers or pans;
Moist Average More than 4 ft 2
fair to good internal and
external drainage. Slope
may be flat to steep.
soilWetness
To water table, soil not
well drained. Restricting
layers or deep pans may
WET Wet 1–4 ft be present. May occur at 3
base of slopes, on
terraces, upland flats, or
bottom lands.
To water table, sites
waterlogged or flooded at
least part of the year.
Bottomlands subject to
SATURATED Saturated Less than 1 ft 4
frequent overflow. Upland
with poor drainage or
shallow pans. Slopes with
very poor drainage.
Complete, areas
perennially waterlogged.
WATERLOGGED Saturated Zero (surface) 5
No change in water
content or soil strength.

15
 Terrain Parameter
soilDensity
frozenDepth
thawedDepth
vegetationAverageStemSpacing
obstacleHeightIngress
obstacleHeightEgress
obstacleWidth
obstacleApproachAngleIngress
obstacleApproachAngleEgress
Description
3
The dry soil density (kg/m ); use the EDCS attribute SOIL_DENSITY_DRY: The
average density of the <SOIL> between the <SURFACE> and the <BEDROCK>
after it has been dried to a constant <<MASS>> at 105 degrees Celsius.
The depth (cm) of frozen soil from the surface; use the EDCS attribute:
FROZEN_SOIL_LAYER_BOTTOM_DEPTH The depth from the <TERRAIN> to the
base of a layer of frozen <SOIL>.
The depth (cm) of thawed soil from surface, use the EDCS attribute:
FROZEN_SOIL_LAYER_TOP_DEPTH The depth from the <TERRAIN> to the top of
a layer of frozen <SOIL>.
The array of average stem spacing (feet) for the 8 stem-size classes. Use the EDCS
attribute: MEAN_STEM_SPACING_QB_STEM_DIAMETER
<MEAN_STEM_SPACING> of all stems of <STEM_DIAMETER>:
(0.0,OPEN), (2.5,OPEN), (6.0,OPEN), (10.0,OPEN), (14.0,OPEN), (18.0,OPEN),
(22.0,OPEN), (25.0, OPEN); where the first value is the lower limit of the stem
diameter (cm), and “OPEN” is the mean stem spacing of stems greater than the
lower limit. STNDMob expects the “OPEN” values in the same order, in units of feet.
Dimensions (inches and radians) associated with obstacles; the OneSAF features
that have attributes of bank heights, slopes and heights and widths, and which may
be driven over, should or may be considered obstacles; these need to be examined
individually, along with attributes to determine how to map the attributes to the
STNDMob parameters. Figure A1 shows how obstacles are modeled in STNDMob,
ingress and egress are dependant on the direction of vehicle travel, while the
OneSAF features generally have left and right; so vehicle heading and relation to the
feature needs to be considered when mapping the left/right attributes to
ingress/egress. For STNDMob 3.3, egress angles are the angles the vehicle would
encounter as if they were ingress angles and the vehicle was approaching from the
opposite direction, that is, egress is not the angle the vehicle would encounter during
egress.

For obstacle features having the attribute: PRIMARY_MATERIAL_TYPE The type of

primary <MATERIAL> composition of an <OBJECT>. The enumerations are
OneSAF obstacleMaterialType
CONCRETE 0
GLASS 1
obstacleMaterialType
MASONRY 2
STEEL 3
VINYL_SIDING 4
WOOD 5
None
For the features that have the attribute RUBBLE_STABILITY; the ability of
<RUBBLE> to resist sliding or collapsing under stress; rubble stability. The
stabilityRubble enumerations are
CONSOLIDATED stabilityRubble = 0
LOOSE stabilityRubble = 1
The radius (m) of the path a vehicle is following; calculated outside of STNDMob
radiusCurvature
using 3 points (previous location, current location and projected location).
1
Terms within < > are further defined in the EDCS.

16