Physics Depth Study

Introduction: In modern-day urban society, speed bumps are strategically placed around the
world to improve road safety and enforce speed limits (Wikipedia, 2024). Theoretically, speed
bumps slow down vehicles by the dissipation of kinetic energy, however, speed bumps also
visually prompt drivers to slow down, as it causes discomfort when crossing a speed bump at
higher speeds (Ashish Gupta, 2013). To test to what extent the two factors above slow down
vehicles, will be purely looking at the physics behind a speed bump and how it slows down
vehicles without human bias.

Research Question: This research aims to investigate the effects of speed bump on the
change of velocity of vehicles on a small scale and how bump height affects their
performance in reducing vehicle velocity.

Background Information:
How does a speed bump work
In real life, the main reason speed bumps work as a road safety measure is that the driver
must slow down before approaching one to avoid damage to the vehicle. Contemporary speed
bumps come in different shapes and sizes. While most speed bumps applied in real life are
made to minimise discomfort and damage to the vehicle by creating a rounded edge for a
smooth transition onto and off the speedbump, all bumps considered in this investigation will
have a box-like shape. However, speed bumps are speculated to still slow down vehicles,
without decelerating before encountering one.
Before a vehicle encounters a speed bump, it has a certain amount of kinetic energy due to its
initial velocity. As the vehicle passes through the speed bump, the wheels are required to go
over an elevated plane. While the vehicle is climbing the plane, some of its kinetic energy is
converted to gravitational potential energy, which corresponds to the law of conservation of
energy. The law states that the total energy of a closed system should remain the same. This
causes a loss in kinetic energy, hence a reduction in horizontal velocity but an increase in
potential energy. As the wheels are at on top of the bump, they possess both kinetic energy,
which contributes to the horizontal motion, and gravitational potential energy, which is stored
through climbing the elevated plane. Since the bump has a box-like shape, it ends abruptly.
Therefore, when the vehicle descends the bump, its gravitational energy is converted back to
kinetic energy but this time, perpendicularly downwards to the direction of motion. Due to its
direction not being aligned with the direction of motion, the kinetic energy is absorbed by the
structure of the vehicle and the road. The impact causes kinetic energy to dissipate as heat,
vibrations, and sound. This results in a decrease in the horizontal velocity of the vehicle as
the kinetic energy converted from gravitational potential energy does not contribute to
horizontal motion.
In practical situations, aside from the dissipated energy, a sudden force is applied to the
ground by the wheels as the car drops abruptly. The force contributes to a higher total normal
force of the vehicle for a short amount of time. The formula for frictional force is f =μN ,
where f is the frictional force, μ is the friction coefficient, and N is the normal force
(Britannica, 2019). As seen from the formula, friction is proportional to the friction
coefficient and the normal force. The increase in normal force leads to an increase in friction
force. The frictional force is in the opposite direction of motion, therefore, increasing drag
and further decreasing the velocity of the vehicle.
The amount of energy loss, when a vehicle encounters a bump height, is mainly caused by
two factors, which can be found in the equation of gravitational potential energy - U =mgh.
U is gravitational potential energy, m is the mass of the object, g is the gravitational
acceleration constant and h is the height above ground (ThumperTalk, 2015). The
gravitational acceleration on Earth is approximately 9.8 ms-1 and doesn’t change throughout
the investigation, leaving us with height and mass. In this investigation, we will be focusing
on how different bump heights affect the velocities of vehicles and keeping mass constant
throughout the experiment.

Independent Variable:
Bump height (mm, in increments of 0.4mm)

Dependent Variable:
Change in velocity (ms-1)

Controlled Variable:

Variable to Why does it need to be What value will How will the
control/monitor controlled? it be kept at? variable be
controlled/measured?
Mass of vehicle Both mass and bump Weight of the The same cart and
height contribute to the PASCO smart weights will be used
loss of energy, however, cart 250g + 200g for each trial in the
the investigation is weights experiment.
focused on bump height
as the independent
factor, therefore mass
has to stay constant
Initial velocity As we are measuring 1 ms-1 PASCO smart cart
change in velocity, the has a built-in
initial velocity has a launcher that
huge impact on the launches the cart at
change in velocity the same velocity
recorded. If not every time. There are
 controlled properly, 3 speed settings.
inconsistencies can
cause results that don’t
represent the actual
change
Surface of Friction greatly Metal rail The same rail set up
experiment influences the loss of with the same
energy as a vehicle goes material will be used
through a bump due to
the friction formula
above. The friction
coefficient changes as
the surface the vehicle
is moving on is
different
Distance travelled Since a built-in 60cm Speed bumps will be
before encountering launcher is used to stuck onto the metal
speed bump accelerate the cart, we rail at the same spot
need to find an every time, using the
appropriate distance to built-in
allow the cart to get up measurements of the
to speed before metal rail
encountering the bump.
Differences in the
distance in different
trials might cause
results to not represent
changes in velocities
due to bump height
Direction of vehicle To ensure the vehicle Metal rail The same metal rail
motion travels in the same will be used to guide
direction every time, a the cart and create a
metal rail will be used controlled
to guide the smart cart. environment for the
This can prevent energy experiment
loss due to ulterior
factors by limiting the
path of the smart cart.
Bump width and Bump width and length Width 2.5cm Bumps are measured
length will be kept constant Span across the accurately using a
throughout the full width of the ruler and cut
experiment to ensure metal rail according to
bump height is the only dimensions. Bumps
factor affecting the should also span
change in velocity. across the full width
Different bump of the metal rail,
dimensions will cause making sure the
results to not wheels are travelling
correspond with over it
changes in bump height.
 Hypothesis:
As the height of the bump increases, there will be a corresponding increase in the change of
velocity. This is attributed to the greater conversion of gravitational potential energy from
kinetic energy, which is dissipated after descending the bump.

Equipment List:
PASCO Smart Cart
Metal Rail
Bumper attachment x2
Laptop
100g weights x2
Duct Tape
Ruler
Scissors

Images of Setup:

Figure 1: Image of 2 weights stuck to Figure 2: Image of Figure 3: Image of the

PASCO smart cart placements of end bumper whole setup of experiment
and speed bumps on the
metal rail
Method:
Preparation
1. Lay down the metal rail on a flat surface.
2. Attach both bumper attachments on both ends of the rail.
 3. Cut duct tape strips with a length that can cover the entire rail and a width of 2.5cm.
30 of these strips are needed.
4. Use the duct tape strips to create speed bumps. Stick strips of tape on top of each
other until you have speed bumps with 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 layers of duct tape.

Recording
1. Connect the PASCO smart cart to the laptop software
2. Attach the speed bump with 2 layers of tape at the 60cm mark of the metal rail
3. Place the PASCO smart cart at the starting end of the rail. Ensuring the cart is stable
by attaching two 100g weights on top of the cart to prevent it from derailing.
4. Start recording using the PASCO laptop software to capture the cart’s motion.
5. Carefully press the trigger button on the cart’s launcher to start movement.
6. Observe the cart as it passes through the speed bump.
7. Stop recording data on the software once the cart reaches the end of the rail.
8. Repeat steps 2-7 for other speed bumps, with 4, 6, 8, and 10 layers of duct tape.
9. Lastly, do a trial without any speed bumps as control

Risk Assessment:

Identified Risk Risk Assessment Control

Since the cart is travelling at There is a low risk of this The experiment can be
high speeds, there might be happening as the cart cannot conducted on the ground to
a chance of it derailing and cause serious damage and prevent the cart from falling
causing physical damage. the cart itself is durable. off the table causing
The cart itself might also get damage. You should also
damaged if there weren’t pay close attention when
precautions. conducting the experiment
and react accordingly when
something happens.
There might be a chance of There is a low risk of this Check for any software
software malfunction or data happening since the PASCO updates before conducting
loss software is advanced the experiment. Also, make
sure the recorded data is
accurate before doing all the
trials.

Data Collection:
Qualitative Data:
There were a few notable observations throughout the experiment. Firstly, on trials with taller
speed bumps, sometimes the PASCO cart would derail, causing it to move in unpredictable
directions. This occurs because when the cart travelling at high speeds hits a tall bump, the
sudden impulse causes it to rapidly move vertically, derailing the cart. Therefore, certain runs
where I encountered this problem were re-recorded, and the failed run would be voided.
Aside from that observation, I also noticed that the cart had two instances of going through
the bump. The front set of wheels and the rear set of wheels. Two vertical movements could
be easily seen when conducting the experiment and the two instances of going through the
bump are speculated to further increase the change in velocity.
Loud sounds were also heard as the cart travelled over the bumps. Generally, a louder sound
was noticed with trials on taller speed bumps. This could suggest that a significant amount of
the gravitational potential energy is transferred into vibrations, which explains the loud noises
made as the cart encounters the speed bump.

Raw Data:

Figure 4: Velocity time graph exported from the PASCO software

Data is analysed and the change in velocity is put into a table. Each duct tape layer is 0.2mm.

Bump Height (mm) Change in velocity (decrease, ms-1)

0 0
0.4 0.12
0.8 0.18
1.2 0.2
1.6 0.23
2.0 0.32
Figure 5: Table of results analysed from the raw graph above
Graph of final analysed data, with change in velocity on the y-axis and bump height on the x-
axis:

Figure 6: Final graph with change in velocity against bump height

Analysing Data:
Looking at Figure 4, we can see that the initial velocity of all trials is nearly identical, at
approximately 1 ms-1. This tells us that the experiment is conducted in a controlled
environment and that the initial kinetic energy is the same for each trial. However, right as the
cart hits the bump, there is a spike in velocity shown on the graph. The specific reason for
such a pattern is not known, but it is speculated to be an instrumental error of the smart cart
sensors. Another reason for the spike in velocity could be due to the increase in vertical
velocity as the cart goes through a speed bump. The vertical velocity could be added to the
initial velocity, causing the graph to show a spike in velocity right before encountering the
bump. From Figure 4, we can also see how the cart’s velocities change before having a
constant final velocity, which is lower than the initial velocity. The two troughs shown in the
graphs represent the decreased velocity experienced by the front and rear wheels of the cart
as mentioned in the qualitative data.
To better visualise how and to what extent bump height affects the change in velocity of
vehicles, a table is made with bump height and change in velocity, see Figure 5. Change in
velocity is calculated by taking the difference between the initial velocity and the constant
final velocity. The value is kept positive throughout the investigation, but the changes
mentioned all represent the decrease in velocity. The table is then plotted into a scatter plot
graph in Excel, and we get Figure 6. The scatter plot provides a clear representation of how
bump height affects the change in velocity. The x-axis corresponds to the bump height in
millimetres and the y-axis corresponds to the change in velocity in ms-1. Each point on the
graph also represents a specific trial with a different bump height. After looking at the graph,
we can see a noticeable trend. As the bump height increases, the change in velocity also
increases. This relationship suggests that a higher bump height results in a greater decrease in
velocity when compared to a lower bump height. When a trendline is created on the graph,
data points are close to the trendline, meaning the variance of the results is not high. We can
describe the relationship between bump height and change in velocity as having a strong
positive correlation. The results correspond to my background theory and support my initial
hypothesis which states that as the height of the bump increases, there will be a
corresponding increase in the change of velocity. Furthermore, the gradient of the trend line is
approximately 0.14, this implies that for every 1 millimetre of increase in bump height, the
velocity of the cart will decrease by 0.14ms-1. These values are extremely useful and can be
applied to real-life easily. The values for bump height and change in velocity can be scaled up
and an optimal bump that balances comfort and decrease in velocity can be made.
To ensure the experiment results are reliable and correct, we can use the law of conservation
of energy to compare the total energy before and after the cart goes through the bump. The
following are the calculations for bump height of 0.4 mm
K 1 +U 1=K 2+U 2

1 2 1 2
mu + mgh= m v + mgh
2 2
1 1
( 0.55 ) ( 1 )2+ ( 0.55 ) ( 9.907 ) ( 0 ) = (0.55)¿
2 2
0.275 J ≠ 0.215 J

The imbalance in the equation of mechanical conservation of energy implies that aside from
the dissipation of the transferred potential energy, there are also other factors slowing down
the cart that aren’t included in the calculations above. Factors like air resistance, friction and
properties of the surface can all contribute to further slowing down the cart and are hard to
measure.

Conclusion:
In conclusion, on a small scale, change in velocity increases proportionally as bump height
increases as shown in experiment results. These results consolidate my hypothesis and can be
explained using the law of conservation of energy. As bump height increases, the amount of
potential energy converted from kinetic increases, as according to U =mgh, height is
proportional to potential energy. The increased conversion of energy leads to an increased
amount of lost energy, which is dissipated through heat and vibrations. Using this theory, the
loud sounds as the cart goes through the bump mentioned above are caused by the vibrations
from the dissipation of energy, which is very sensible. From the results, we can safely assume
that speed bumps do in fact slow down vehicles and don't just cause discomfort which
encourages drivers to slow down. This is useful for urban planning and road safety as it
prevents speeding by reckless drivers and can effectively improve road safety. Moreover, the
results collected from this experiment could be extended and applied in real life. The values
could be upscaled to real-life road dimensions, which can be instrumental in road safety
planning. Nonetheless, there are still limitations to the data collected and a lot of
improvements can be made which will be covered in the section below.

Evaluation:
The results collected show a significant correlation between the two variables of the
experiment. However, we still must acknowledge there is some variation in the data points.
The main error speculated to have affected the results would be human error when launching
the smart cart. The smart cart has a built-in launcher that can be activated through a button on
the cart. When pressing the button before the trial, some initial force could be applied to the
cart, which affects its overall kinetic energy and affects the result.
Another reason that could have caused the variation in data would be the wheel conditions.
As the cart encounters more and more speed bumps, the levels of wear vary and can lead to
different frictional forces between the wheels and the surface of the metal rail. Although its
effect should be minimal due to the small number of trials done, it should also be considered.
Factors that couldn’t be quantified using simple equipment, like air resistance and friction,
could have further slowed down the cart. But, due to not being able to collect data on these
factors, to what extent each of these factors slows down the cart cannot be determined.
To further minimise these variations and errors, several improvements can be made to
enhance the experiment’s accuracy and reliability. For example, multiple runs for each bump
height can be done and the average across those runs can be taken before plotting the data
points. This can lower the variance of the data and make sure the result values are closer to
the true value. Aside from that, the launch mechanism can also be altered to ensure a more
consistent initial velocity, which can’t be influenced by human factors. A ramp with an
unbiased release can be created to ensure the cart possesses the same amount of kinetic
energy before encountering a speed bump on every trial. As I conducted the experiment, the
software collected data at 50Hz, meaning 50 times a second. Picking a higher Hz can also
help with the accuracy of the data, however, it was not possible due to hardware restrictions.
With a better computer, a higher Hz should also be considered, to minimise any errors and
achieve better accuracy. In addition, using more advanced equipment, factors like air
resistance and friction could be measured and taken into account when looking at to what
extent is bump height the determining factor for slowing down vehicles. With data on air
resistance and friction, those factors could be included in the calculations, further providing
us with a more accurate value of how much energy was lost throughout the whole process of
the cart going through a speed bump.
All in all, although still can be improved, the experiment is considered successful and a lot
more information and theory behind speed bumps have been discussed. To further my
knowledge of the topic, I would love to extend my research on how the data collected above
can be scaled and applied to real-life for urban planning or road safety measures. I would also
like to explore how speed bumps affect the change of velocities in vehicles with suspension,
how suspension systems absorb energy and how might the results differ from vehicles
without suspension.

References & Citations

A Project Report on STUDY on SPEED PROFILE across SPEED BUMPS. Ashish Gupta

2013.
“Dyno Data –and What It Tells Us about How to Tune a Shim Stack and Control the Shape

of the Damping Force Curve.” ThumperTalk, 19 Feb. 2015,

www.thumpertalk.com/forums/topic/1124437-dyno-data-%E2%80%93and-what-it-

tells-us-about-how-to-tune-a-shim-stack-and-control-the-shape-of-the-damping-force-

curve/page/14/. Accessed 12 May 2024.

“Speed Bump.” Wikipedia, 15 Apr. 2024,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_bump#Speed_bumps. Accessed 12 May 2024.

The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Coefficient of Friction | Physics.” Encyclopædia

Britannica, 24 June 2020, www.britannica.com/science/coefficient-of-friction.

Zeidan, Adam. “Friction | Definition, Types, & Formula.” Encyclopædia Britannica, 25 Jan.

2019, www.britannica.com/science/friction.