Applied Mechanics and Materials Vol.

245 (2013) pp 235-240 Online: 2012-12-13

© (2013) Trans Tech Publications, Switzerland
doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.245.235

Amphibious Vehicle Abilities Analysis

VINTR Zdenek
University of Defence, Brno, Czech Republic
zdenek.vintr@unob.cz

Keywords: Combat vehicle, vehicle speed, current speed, water obstacle.

Abstract. The article deals with a solution of selected problems associated with evaluation of
armoured vehicles flotation ability. Main attention is devoted to analysis of possible methods of
vehicle ability evaluation to pass over a water obstacle with respect to its current speed. The
presented procedures were practically used for evaluation of capability to cross water obstacles in
the case of a new wheeled armored personnel carrier of the Army of the Czech Republic.

Introduction
Fielding the new military equipment to units requires, among others, ascertaining that the
respective equipment complies with the provisions of all relevant regulations and standards in effect
in a given country. Thus, in the case of amphibious vehicle it is necessary to assess whether the
vehicle meets the requirements for vessels, since the vehicle is considered to be a vessel when it is
floating. In the Czech Republic, general requirements for vessels are stipulated by the appropriate
law and the related regulations. In addition, the Czech Republic, as a NATO country, must also
comply with provisions of all standardisation agreements which it has acceded to.
STANAG 2805 [1] plays a special role in the case of amphibious vehicles because it describes
requirements for the military vehicle’s capability to negotiate water obstacles. The Czech Republic
has acceded to this standardization agreement and implemented it as the Czech Defence Standard
[2], which defines general fording and floating requirements for combat vehicles so as to meet
tactical and operational objectives. From the viewpoint of this article, the most important is the
requirement of the standard [2] which states: “Military vehicles shall be capable to negotiating
water obstacles by fording or flotation with a current speed of 1.5 m s-1 minimum”.
Practical verification of the accomplishment of this requirement during the flotation test of the
vehicle is very difficult since to conduct a test, there is necessary to be available both water with
corresponding parameters (an adequate width and depth and required current speed) and conditions
suitable to perform a test (approach to water, suitable entry to and exit from water, environmental
aspects …). That is why, as an alternative for the flotation test, two general evaluation methods have
been projected to identify whether the appropriate vehicle meets the given requirement. The article
presents a brief characteristic of these two methods.

Methods of Vehicle Flotation Analysis

There exist no valid standards, directives, regulations and modern technical literature stating any
general applicable rule or procedure that would enable for a specific amphibious vehicle to
determine a maximum permissible speed of a current, at which the vehicle is capable of safely
negotiating the water obstacle. In general, it can be stated that for a permissible speed of a current
can be considered such a speed of a current at which the vehicle can safely negotiate a water
obstacle in a required place, to overcome this water obstacle by flotation in a desired direction and
exit the water obstacle in a pre-determined place. The afore-mentioned indicates that maximum
permissible speed of a current will especially depend on technical parameters characterizing the
vehicle capability to float in water: maximum forward and reverse flotation speed, acceleration
during swimming (time needed to achieve the maximum floating speed from the static position),

All rights reserved. No part of contents of this paper may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without the written permission of Trans
Tech Publications, www.ttp.net. (ID: 130.237.29.138, Kungliga Tekniska Hogskolan, Stockholm, Sweden-12/07/15,03:00:51)
236 Biomechanics, Neurorehabilitation, Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing
Systems, Robotics and Aerospace

turning radius and floating speed during turning, vehicle list and trim during direct floating and
turning, safe distance (vertical distance between a plane of the greatest permissible draught of a
vessel and parallel plane passing through the lowest point, above which the vessel is no more
considered to be watertight), etc.
The maximum permissible current speed can be also influenced by some characteristic features
of the water obstacle negotiated. These are water obstacle width, water obstacle depth, current
direction, bed and bank characteristics, bank height and slope and type of plant-cover. The before-
mentioned means that it is not possible to determine a universal value of maximum permissible
speed of a current for a special type of vehicle, since this value can change with the nature of water
obstacle case by case. A certain „conservative” value of maximum permissible speed of a current
can be determined for every vehicle. Its respecting will ensure a safe negotiation of water obstacle
(if the speed of a current will be lower than this determined value), regardless of its actual
characteristic features. From the viewpoint of maximum permissible speed of a current, two
methods to assess the amphibious vehicle capability to negotiate water obstacles are presented in
this paper:
• Analysis of the amphibious vehicle movement during its flotation in a current under
recommendations of the current professional literature;
• Comparison of flotation capabilities of the evaluated vehicle with capabilities of fielded
amphibious vehicles that are long time in operation.

Movement of an Amphibious Vehicle in a Current

An analysis of the amphibious vehicle movement in a current is based on the following
simplified assumptions:
• Water obstacle is sufficiently deep (except for entry and exit areas, wheels or other parts of
the vehicle are not in contact with the ground of water obstacle);
• Current in the section investigated moves in a uniform straight motion;
• The current speed is the same in the entire width of water obstacle.
The above-mentioned simplifications do not basically influence a general conclusion of the
analysis, because they in fact are the limit solution. For example, maximum speed of a current is
usually achieved only in its central part and outside this part; its effect is smaller, which creates
more favourable conditions for the vehicle flotation. With the above-mentioned assumptions taken
account, a current can be regarded as an inertial system (carried away by the current velocity) in
relation to the coordinate system close-connected with the shore of the obstacle, see Fig. 1. When
discussing on a speed and direction of the vehicle flotation, it will always mean a speed and
direction in relation to the inertial system moving with the current. When talking about a velocity
and direction of the vehicle speed, it will always mean a speed and direction in relation to the
inertial system close-connected with the shore of the water obstacle. Under the assumption that the
coordinate system is oriented so that the speed vector of the current is parallel to axis y, then the
motion of the vehicle flotation in a current can be described by the following equations:
• The speed of the vehicle motion in direction of axis x:

v x = vv cos αv . (1)

• The speed of the vehicle motion in direction of axis y:

v y = vv sin αv − vc . (2)

• Resulting speed of the vehicle motion:

 Applied Mechanics and Materials Vol. 245 237

v = v x2 + v 2y . (3)
• Direction of the vehicle motion:
vy
α = arctg . (4)
vx

Bank of the Water

y Obstacle

Current Speed
Floating Speed of Vehicle

vc
vv

vv

v
vy
vx
vc

αv
x
Figure 1. Vehicle motion in a current.

Respecting the fact that for military amphibious vehicles is a priority to be capable of negotiating
water obstacle, i.e. the capability to cross the current (in direction of axis x), a special role is played
by Eq. 2 which expresses a speed with which the vehicle moves in the direction of axis y, because
this motion is in principle unwanted in transverse crossing the current. From this respect, an
optimum will be a situation when the vehicle speed of motion in direction of axis y equals to zero
vy = 0. With the use of equation Eq. 2 we can see that this situation will happen at certain direction
of the vehicle floating expressed by angle αvo (optimum angle of floating direction):

vc
αvo = arcsin . (5)
vv

From this optimum angle of floating we can calculate a maximum speed for the vehicle to be
able to perpendicularly negotiate water obstacle at a given speed of a current:

vmax = vv cos αvo . (6)

The above-mentioned equations will result in general conclusions. With an increase of the
current speed decreases the speed with which the vehicle is capable of negotiating water obstacle (in
direction of axis x). When the speed of a current achieves a value equalling to the vehicle floating
velocity, the vehicle completely loses its capability to negotiate water obstacle cross-wise. It is seen
that vehicle loses its capability to safely negotiate water obstacle even at much lower speed of a
238 Biomechanics, Neurorehabilitation, Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing
Systems, Robotics and Aerospace

current. However, there exist no valid standards, directives, and regulations with guidance how to
establish the maximum permissible velocity of a current. It is apparent that a sufficient manoeuvring
capability for amphibious vehicle also must be ensured so as to enable the vehicle to exit the water
obstacle at a pre-determined place (a capability to effectively float against the current, if need be).
The present-day literature [3], [4], [5], provides an indirect answer how to determine the
maximum permissible speed of a current. According to these suggestions vessel designed to
transversally negotiate a current (ferry boat) should be used only in such a current that would enable
the vessel to utilize most of its propelling power to move in a desired direction rather than to
overcome the effect of current. As the floating speed is directly dependent on the propelling device
power, the afore-mentioned requirement can be expressed can be expressed the following way: it is
desirable that during transversal crossing the water obstacle a component of the vehicle floating
speed in the direction of axis y is always less than a component of the vehicle floating speed in the
direction of axis x. This condition can be met only if under given conditions (given speed of the
vehicle floating and current speed) for a value of optimum angle of floating is true that:

αvo < 45o . (7)

Then, using the equation (5) the maximum permissible speed of a current can be:
vc max < vv sin 45o .
(8)
By adjustment of this non-equation we will obtain a relation, which expresses the minimum
floating speed which the vehicle has to have so as to be able to negotiate water obstacle in a given
speed of a current:

vc
vv > (9)
sin 45o

In this relation by substituting for a speed of a current a value established in the respective
standard [2] (see paragraph 1), we will obtain the minimum floating velocity that the vehicle has to
have so as to comply with the provisions of the standard:

vv > 2.12 m ⋅ s -1

Comparison of the Assessed Vehicle with Other Vehicles

At the present time, a whole series of both wheeled and tracked amphibious vehicles have been
fielded in the armed forces of individual countries in the world. The respective directives and
regulations, which stipulate principles of the use of these vehicles, also state conditions that limit
their capabilities to negotiate water obstacles by floatation. These documentations define maximum
speed of floating and maximum permissible speed of a current. Tab. 1 lists these basic data for
selected amphibious vehicles.
In terms of the issue under study, it is irrelevant how for individual vehicles was determined the
maximum permissible speed of current, but important is that for a greater part of these vehicles,
suitability of this value was verified in the long-term operation, in the training and sometimes even
in a combat condition. Consequently, it can be stated that maximum permissible speed defined in
the appropriate documentation is appropriately established and its respecting will provide safe
negotiation of water obstacles by single types of vehicles. The principle of the assessment method of
the amphibious vehicle’s capability to negotiate water obstacle with respect to the speed of a current
will be based on a comparison of selected parameters for the amphibious vehicles with a long-term
usage and for the assessed vehicle.
 Applied Mechanics and Materials Vol. 245 239

Tab. 1: Abilities of the selected amphibious vehicles

Type of the Floating speed Max. speed of

Vehicle Category
vehicle [km h-1] current [m s-1]
BVP-1 Infantry Fighting Vehicle 7-8 1.2
BVP-2 Infantry Fighting Vehicle 7 1.2
OT-62 Tracked Armoured Personnel Carrier 10.8 1.5
MT-LB Tracked Armoured Personnel Carrier 5-6 0.9
BRDM-2 Wheeled Armoured Personnel Carrier 9 - 10 1.4
OT-65 Wheeled Armoured Personnel Carrier 8 - 10 1.3
OT-64 Wheeled Armoured Personnel Carrier 9 1.3
BTR-60 Wheeled Armoured Personnel Carrier 10 1.4
122 mm ShH 2S1 Self-Propelled Howitzer 4.5 0.6

In terms of the issue under study, it is irrelevant how for individual vehicles was determined the
maximum permissible speed of current, but important is that for a greater part of these vehicles,
suitability of this value was verified in the long-term operation, in the training and sometimes even
in a combat condition. Consequently, it can be stated that maximum permissible speed defined in
the appropriate documentation is appropriately established and its respecting will provide safe
negotiation of water obstacles by single types of vehicles. The principle of the assessment method of
the amphibious vehicle’s capability to negotiate water obstacle with respect to the speed of a current
will be based on a comparison of selected parameters for the amphibious vehicles with a long-term
usage and for the assessed vehicle.
The basic data applied for comparison are: the vehicle floating velocity and established
maximum permissible speed of a current. From this data, comparison parameters were derived that
characterize for single vehicles a relationship of the vehicle floating speed and maximum
permissible speed of current defined by the regulation. These are the following parameters:
• The ratio of the vehicle floating velocity to the maximum permissible speed of a current (the
higher is the value, the better is the capability to negotiate obstacles);
• Optimum angle of floating calculated from the Eq. 5 for the maximum permissible speed of a
current (the lower is the value, the better is the capability to negotiate obstacles);
• Speed of floating against a current at maximum permissible speed of a current (higher values
means better capability to negotiate obstacles).
Tab. 2 presents calculated values of studied parameters for the vehicles presented in Tab. 1. For
the vehicles, the maximum floating speed of which is given by a span of two values, to calculate a
value corresponding to the mean value of a given span was used. Note that the condition that the
optimum angle of floating at the maximum permissible speed of current should be less than 45o is
met for all the vehicles studied.
An assessment of whether the studied amphibious vehicle meets the standard requirement [2] is
conducted by means of the maximum speed of floating of the vehicle studied and with the use of the
speed of a current defined in the standard [2] appropriate parameters are determined which are
compared with the values obtained for the vehicles verified in a long-term operation, for example,
with average values achieved in the group of similar-type vehicles. If the parameters of the studied
vehicle correspond to these values (they do not go beyond the range of values characterizing the
reference set of vehicles), it can be assumed that the requirement of the standard [2] has been met.
240 Biomechanics, Neurorehabilitation, Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing
Systems, Robotics and Aerospace

Table 2. Calculated parameters for selected vehicles

Parameter assessed
Floating speed to Optimum floating Floating speed against
current speed ratio angle [°] current [km·h-1]
BVP-1 1.74 35.17 3.18
BVP-2 1.62 38.11 2.68
Type of the vehicle

OT-62 2.00 30.00 5.40

MT-LB 1.70 36.09 2.26
BRDM-2 1.88 32.04 4.46
OT-65 1.92 31.33 4.32
OT-64 1.92 31.33 4.32
BTR-60 1.98 30.26 4.96
122 mm ShH 2S1 2.08 28.69 2.34
Average value 1.87 32.56 3.77

Conclusion
The presented methods, in spite of their simplicity provide to relatively easy and at the same time
sufficiently credibly assess whether the vehicle evaluated meets the requirements of the appropriate
allied standard [1] or the Czech standard [2] in terms of the current speed to be negotiated by the
vehicle. Nevertheless, these methods can never substitute flotation test of the vehicle, because they
only facilitate to assess the only parameter from the whole set of parameters characterizing the
vehicle capability to negotiate the water obstacle. The floating tests both on still and running water
are always necessary to completely assess the vehicle parameter.
The methods have been successfully used in practice in evaluating floating capabilities of new
wheeled infantry fighting vehicle, being currently fielded into the Army of the Czech Republic
armament [6].

Acknowledgment
The work presented in this paper was supported by the Ministry of Defence of the Czech
Republic (PRO K-202, University of Defence).

References
[1] STANAG 2805 (Edition 5) Fording and flotation requirements for combat and support ground
vehicle (NATO Standardisation Agreement).
[2] COS 23 5001- Fording and flotation for military vehicles – General requirements (Czech
Defence Standard - in Czech).
[3] V. Bertrlam, Practical Ship Hydrodynamics, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, 2000.
[4] J. N. Newman, Marine Hydrodynamics, MIT, Cambridge, 1999.
[5] E. C. Tupper, K. J. Rawson, Basic Ship Theory, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, 2001.
[6] Z. Vintr, Evaluation Of Armoured Vehicles Flotation Ability, in: Proceedings of the
International Conference on Military Technologies 2009 (ICMT’09), University of Defence, Brno,
2009, pp. 89-96.
Biomechanics, Neurorehabilitation, Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing Systems, Robotics and
Aerospace
10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.245

Amphibious Vehicle Abilities Analysis

10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.245.235