Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Speed bump

A speed bump is a device consisting of a short, raised transverse ridge constructed across a way to reduce speeds, typically forcing drivers to slow to 2–10 . Unlike longer, gentler speed humps designed for 15–20 on streets, speed bumps are narrower and steeper, making them suitable for lots, driveways, and areas requiring more abrupt deceleration. Commonly made of , rubber, or , they span the full width of the road and are marked with or to alert drivers. The modern speed bump was invented in 1953 by Nobel Prize-winning physicist Arthur Holly Compton at , who installed ridges to curb fast-driving students near campus buildings. Earlier precursors appeared in 1906 in , where raised crosswalks aimed to slow vehicles. Deployed widely since the mid-20th century as part of broader strategies, speed bumps have demonstrated effectiveness in lowering average speeds by up to 10 mph and reducing injury crashes, particularly for pedestrians and children, with studies showing 53–60% fewer severe incidents in treated areas. Despite these benefits, speed bumps face criticism for delaying emergency vehicles, increasing noise and from acceleration-deceleration cycles, diverting traffic to other streets, and accelerating wear on suspensions and undercarriages. Empirical evaluations indicate modest overall reductions of around 5–20%, prompting some municipalities to favor alternatives like dynamic or strips when implementation costs and maintenance outweigh localized gains.

Definition and Purpose

Core Function and Mechanism

Speed bumps serve as vertical deflection devices in traffic calming strategies, designed to compel drivers to lower vehicle speeds in designated low-volume areas such as residential neighborhoods, school zones, and parking facilities. By elevating the roadway surface, typically 3 to 4 inches high, they induce discomfort in vehicle occupants when traversed at excessive velocities, thereby enforcing compliance with desired speed limits through physical rather than regulatory means. Studies indicate that properly installed speed bumps can reduce average vehicle speeds by up to 40% while decreasing accident risks by approximately 50%. The mechanism relies on the interaction between the vehicle's dynamics and the abrupt change in profile. As a approaches the bump, its forward —governed by —resists the sudden vertical rise encountered by the wheels, causing the suspension system to compress rapidly and transmit oscillatory forces to the and passengers. This results in pitching motion and jolts, with the intensity scaling inversely with traversal time: higher speeds shorten the contact duration, amplifying the peak forces experienced. From an perspective, the bump's , including , width, and , optimizes this deflection to maximize discomfort at speeds above the target (often 10-15 ) without causing structural damage to vehicles or the device itself. The delivered— change equals times time—remains roughly constant for the vertical , but the reduced time at higher speeds elevates the required , rendering rapid passage untenable for comfort. Government guidelines affirm that such vertical deflections effectively encourage speed reduction by prioritizing occupant aversion to repeated jolts over habitual driving behavior.

Intended Applications

Speed bumps are designed for deployment in low-volume, low-speed environments to enforce reduced vehicle velocities, typically aiming for 5 to 10 over the device, thereby enhancing safety and minimizing collision risks in areas with vulnerable users. Their application is targeted at settings where abrupt deceleration is tolerable, such as private driveways, commercial entrances, and parking facilities, where they prevent high-speed maneuvers that could damage vehicles or . In residential neighborhoods, speed bumps serve to deter cut-through and excessive speeding on local streets, fostering safer conditions for children and residents by lowering average speeds and increasing driver awareness. They are particularly suited for streets with posted limits of 25 to 30 miles per hour or less, where they integrate into broader strategies to reduce overall volume and severity of incidents. Institutional applications include school zones and hospital vicinities, where speed bumps prioritize protection of pedestrians, such as students crossing streets, by compelling near-complete stops and discouraging risky behaviors like weaving. In parking lots—common at retail centers, apartments, and educational facilities—they safeguard against collisions with fixtures or persons by maintaining controlled flows in confined spaces, though they are generally avoided on emergency routes to prevent delays for .

History

Early Precursors

One of the earliest documented precursors to the modern speed bump was implemented in , in 1906, where crosswalks were raised approximately five inches to deter excessive speeds by early automobiles. At the time, vehicles commonly reached speeds of up to 30 , posing risks in residential areas, and this elevation forced drivers to slow for smoother passage. The measure was part of broader efforts to manage emerging automotive without relying solely on , reflecting initial adaptations to control velocity through physical road modifications. Reported in on June 7, 1906, the installation marked an early instance of intentional vertical disruption on roadways aimed specifically at vehicular deceleration.

Modern Invention and Adoption

The modern speed bump, often distinguished from earlier rudimentary raised crosswalks by its deliberate engineered profile for consistent velocity reduction, was invented in 1953 by , a in physics and chancellor of . Compton developed the device, termed "traffic control bumps," after observing vehicles traveling at excessive speeds past Brookings Hall, posing hazards to pedestrians including students and faculty. These initial bumps were constructed with a raised, sinusoidal shape to induce discomfort at higher speeds while permitting passage at reduced velocities around 10-15 mph, marking a shift toward proactive via vertical deflection rather than signage alone. Adoption began on U.S. university campuses, where the bumps effectively curbed speeds in pedestrian-heavy areas without relying on , prompting experimentation with materials like and rubber for durability. By the and , municipalities expanded their use to residential streets and school vicinities amid rising automobile ownership and concerns over child safety, with federal guidelines from the U.S. later endorsing them as low-cost interventions reducing average speeds by up to 10 mph. In , speed bumps entered widespread application during the as part of broader initiatives, particularly in the and , where "sleeping policemen" variants addressed urban congestion and accident rates; this paralleled U.S. trends but emphasized integration with bicycle-friendly infrastructure. Empirical assessments from this era confirmed efficacy in lowering crash frequencies by 20-50% in treated zones, though debates arose over emergency vehicle delays, spurring refinements like speed cushions.

Design and Composition

Materials and Construction

Speed bumps are commonly constructed using or for permanent installations integrated into the roadway surface, providing durability against repeated impacts. These materials are applied by forming a raised mound directly on the existing , often involving layering hot-mix or pouring forms, followed by compaction and surface sealing to ensure adhesion and weather resistance. requires precise to achieve specified profiles, with tolerances for height and taper to minimize damage while enforcing speed reduction. Rubber, frequently sourced from recycled tires combined with virgin rubber, serves as a primary for prefabricated speed bumps, offering flexibility, absorption, and resistance to cracking under load capacities exceeding 66,000 pounds. These modular units are manufactured off-site and installed by anchoring with bolts or spikes into the or substrate, enabling rapid deployment without extensive roadwork. variants, though less durable, are used for temporary applications and similarly bolted in place, prioritizing ease over . Hybrid constructions may incorporate reflective strips or paints on these bases for visibility, applied post-installation to meet standards. Material selection balances permanence, maintenance costs, and environmental impact, with rubber preferred in areas requiring relocation due to its recyclability and lower installation disruption compared to poured .

Standard Dimensions and Specifications

In the , standard speed humps—often the preferred term for engineered vertical deflections—measure 3 to 3.5 inches (76 to 89 mm) in height and 12 to 14 feet (3.7 to 4.3 m) in length along the vehicle travel path, designed to reduce speeds to 15-20 mph on low-volume residential streets. These dimensions follow guidelines from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and (FHWA), with heights occasionally reaching 4 inches (102 mm) for stricter enforcement, though higher profiles increase vehicle stress and emergency response delays. The cross-section typically adopts a sinusoidal or parabolic profile, with ramp lengths of 3-6 feet (0.9-1.8 m) to distribute forces gradually and minimize harsh jolts, spanning the full roadway width to prevent lane evasion.
ParameterUS Standard RangePurpose/Notes
Height3-3.5 inches (76-89 mm); up to 4 inches (102 mm)Balances deflection for speed control with vehicle durability; taller for lower target speeds.
Length (travel path)12-14 feet (3.7-4.3 m)Ensures smooth traversal at design speed; shorter lengths increase abruptness.
WidthFull roadway span (e.g., 12-24 feet for typical streets)Prevents bypassing; modular for wider applications.
ProfileSinusoidal or trapezoidal rampsReduces peak acceleration on vehicles compared to abrupt triangular shapes.
In the , regulations under the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions (TSRGD) mandate a minimum of 900 mm (3 feet) and height of 25-100 mm (1-4 inches), with approach/departure gradients not exceeding 1:10 to limit damage and ensure for bicycles and emergency vehicles. These specs prioritize gradual inclines over height for urban settings, differing from norms by allowing shorter, steeper profiles in constrained spaces, though empirical tests show they achieve similar 10-15 mph reductions when properly spaced 300-500 feet apart. variants, such as those in following Austroads guidelines, align closely with dimensions at 75-100 mm height and 3.5-4 m but emphasize retro-reflective markings for nighttime visibility per AS 1742 standards. Deviations from these benchmarks, such as non-standard heights exceeding 4 inches, risk increased maintenance costs and litigation from undercarriage impacts, as documented in case studies.

Types and Variants

Traditional Speed Bumps

Traditional speed bumps consist of abrupt, raised transverse ridges across roadways, typically measuring 3 to 6 inches (76 to 152 mm) in height and 1 to 3 feet (0.3 to 0.9 m) in length along the direction of travel, with widths spanning the full to force all to encounter the obstruction. These dimensions create a sharp vertical deflection that induces significant discomfort and potential damage if traversed above 2 to 10 mph (3 to 16 km/h), thereby enforcing near-stop speeds through physical feedback rather than signage alone. Unlike longer, gentler speed humps—which extend 10 to 14 feet (3 to 4.3 m) and target 10 to 20 mph (16 to 32 km/h) via sinusoidal profiles—traditional speed bumps prioritize aggressive deceleration for ultra-low-speed environments, such as parking lots, driveways, and private roads where emergency access demands minimal delay but pedestrian hazards persist. Their steeper ramps, often approaching 30 degrees, amplify tire impact forces, reducing average approach speeds by up to 40% in controlled tests, though effectiveness diminishes for non-compliant drivers or larger vehicles with higher ground clearance. Construction traditionally employs poured or for permanence and cost-efficiency, with ramps formed using tapered forms or milled profiles to integrate seamlessly into existing , though this method risks cracking under freeze-thaw cycles or heavy traffic without reinforcement. Modular rubber variants emerged later as alternatives, but remains prevalent for municipal installations due to durability matching road surfaces, typically lasting 5 to 10 years before resurfacing. Invented in 1953 by physicist Arthur Holly Compton at to curb near campus buildings, these devices evolved from early 20th-century raised crosswalks, such as those trialed in Chatham, , in 1906, but gained standardization post-1950s for non-emergency traffic control.

Speed Humps

Speed humps consist of rounded, raised or sections spanning the full width of a roadway, typically measuring 12 feet (3.7 meters) in length along the direction of travel and 3 to 3.5 inches (76 to 89 mm) in height. This induces vertical in exceeding the target speed of 10 to 15 mph (16 to 24 km/h), prompting drivers to slow down for comfort, while permitting smoother traversal at compliant velocities. Distinguishing them from traditional speed bumps, which are shorter (1 to 2 feet or 0.3 to 0.6 meters) and taller (up to 6 inches or 152 mm), speed humps minimize abrupt jolts and delays by allowing higher safe passage speeds. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) recommends sinusoidal or half-sine profiles for optimal deflection without excessive scraping. Empirical data indicate speed humps reduce mean speeds by 5 to 10 (8 to 16 /h) and cut volumes by about 20 percent on residential . A matched case-control of pediatric incidents found speed humps associated with 53 to 60 percent lower odds of or fatality from vehicle strikes. However, effectiveness diminishes on arterials or with wide spacing, as drivers may accelerate between devices. Commonly installed in series with 300 to 600 foot (91 to 183 meter) intervals, speed humps incorporate and markings for visibility, though studies note potential increases in rear-end collisions if drivers brake erratically. Materials include poured for permanence or modular rubber for temporary or repairable setups, with costs ranging from $2,000 to $5,000 per unit depending on construction method.

Speed Cushions

Speed cushions are vertical devices consisting of raised sections with lateral gaps or cutouts that span the width of the roadway, designed to reduce speeds primarily for narrower passenger cars while minimizing disruption for wider-track vehicles such as buses and apparatus. Unlike full-width speed humps, the cutouts allow large vehicles to the cushion with their wheels in the gaps, enabling smoother passage at higher speeds compared to standard humps. This configuration encourages drivers of automobiles to decelerate to approximately 10-15 to avoid discomfort from traversing the raised portions. Typical dimensions for speed cushions include a of 3 to 4 inches, a length of 8 to 12 feet along the direction of travel, and raised sections positioned to leave gaps of about 2-3 feet wide for wheel paths, with the overall aligned to the roadway. spacing is recommended at 260 to 500 feet apart to maintain the desired 85th speeds of 20-30 , ensuring consistent speed moderation without excessive delay. They are placed in areas with adequate and to allow drivers sufficient time. Materials for speed cushions vary, including poured or for permanent installations, which integrate directly with the existing using bases for durability, or modular rubber units bolted to the road surface with rust-resistant anchors for easier deployment and replacement. Rubber variants often utilize recycled synthetic and natural materials, providing flexibility and compared to rigid options. Empirical studies indicate speed cushions effectively lower average vehicle speeds by 5-10 in residential and settings, with greater reductions for vehicles than for buses, which experience minimal speed loss due to the design. A comparative analysis found them more cost-effective than traditional speed humps, achieving similar velocity reductions while preserving response times. However, their depends on proper gap sizing and road alignment, as narrower cushions may insufficiently deter speeds in zones targeting below 20 .

Speed Tables

Speed tables are traffic calming devices featuring a raised, flat-topped section spanning the full width of the roadway, designed to reduce speeds through vertical deflection while providing a smoother ride than traditional speed humps. Unlike speed humps, which have a curved profile over a shorter of 10-14 feet, speed tables incorporate a prolonged flat surface—often 20-30 feet in length—to minimize abrupt jolts, making them suitable for streets with or access. Typically constructed from or prefabricated rubber modules bolted or adhered to the , speed tables rise 3-4 inches above the road surface with gradual ramps on either side to encourage speeds of 10-20 . This design allows larger vehicles, such as buses, to maintain better stability by keeping all wheels on the flat top, reducing the discomfort and potential damage associated with narrower humps. They are commonly installed in residential areas or near schools to deter excessive speeding without fully disrupting . Empirical data from field studies indicate speed tables effectively curb high velocities, with one analysis of seven sites showing dramatic reductions in maximum observed speeds, often limiting 85th percentile speeds to 15-20 mph post-installation. Safety evaluations report crash reductions of 36-64% across multiple implementations, including a 38% drop in total crashes and 93% in injuries in a specific urban study. However, effectiveness can vary with placement; isolated tables on longer streets may prompt gradual rather than immediate deceleration, requiring complementary measures like signage for optimal results.

Dynamic and Adaptive Variants

Dynamic speed bumps differ from static designs by incorporating sensors and actuators to activate only when vehicles exceed a predefined speed threshold, typically remaining flush with the road surface for compliant drivers to minimize disruption to normal traffic flow. These systems employ , inductive loops, or cameras to detect approaching vehicle speeds in , triggering hydraulic, pneumatic, or mechanical mechanisms to raise a barrier or create a disruptive profile for speeders. For instance, the Actibump system, developed in and deployed since the early 2010s, uses radar sensors to monitor speeds up to 50 km/h in urban areas; vehicles at or below the limit encounter a flat surface, while exceedances activate a trap door that sinks a panel, generating a sudden jolt as an inverted hump to enforce compliance without impeding lawful passage. Adaptive variants extend this functionality by modulating the bump's response based on additional factors such as type, weight, or status, often integrating identification technologies like RFID transponders or license plate recognition. Emergency s, for example, can be equipped with signals to deactivate the bump or lower its height entirely, preventing delays in critical responses; heavy goods s may trigger a partial flattening to accommodate loads without excessive wear. A 2022 IEEE study proposed an adaptive speed bump using speed detection and classification to dynamically adjust height, remaining inactive for identified priority s or low-speed traffic while fully engaging for unauthorized speeders. Similarly, hydraulic systems patented for height adjustability allow manual or automated reconfiguration from flat to full protrusion, suiting variable traffic conditions on roadways or as temporary barriers. These designs prioritize causal over passive deterrence, with Actibump evaluations reporting near-total elimination of speeding incidents at sites through repeated physical to violators, though long-term reliability depends on and . Experimental IoT-based smart speed bumps further incorporate environmental , such as , to toggle activation thresholds adaptively, aiming to balance safety with flow in high-volume areas. Despite promising pilots, widespread adoption remains limited by costs—estimated at several thousand euros per unit—and vulnerability to tampering or failures in adverse weather.

Effectiveness and Empirical Evidence

Speed Reduction Outcomes

Speed bumps and humps generally reduce approaching vehicle speeds, with empirical studies reporting average decreases in the 85th percentile speed of 20% or more than 7 mph (11 km/h) across various implementations. For instance, analyses of speed humps indicate reductions ranging from 41.65% for standard humps to 73.52% for steeper bumps, measured immediately prior to traversal, though these figures vary by design parameters such as height and width. Optimal circular humps with heights of 11-15 cm and widths of 125-140 cm have demonstrated speed reductions of 55-75% in controlled tests. The spatial extent of speed moderation often extends beyond the device itself, with gradual deceleration observed up to 30 meters before and after installation sites. Large-scale field data from speed bumps show mean speed drops of approximately 80% immediately before crossing, based on automated tracking across multiple locations. However, post-traversal speeds frequently rebound, and diminishes if drivers anticipate the feature or in high-volume scenarios, leading to inconsistent compliance. Comparative reviews highlight that while speed humps outperform some alternatives like tables (10-65% reduction), outcomes depend on site-specific factors including initial speeds and enforcement context, with meta-analyses confirming average reductions tied to these speed drops but noting variability in raw data. In university campus evaluations, road humps achieved targeted slowdowns to 20-25 km/h, aligning with design intents for zones.

Safety and Accident Reduction Data

A matched case-control study in neighborhoods found that speed humps were associated with a 53% to 60% reduction in the odds of injury or death among children struck by automobiles, based on analysis of 89 child pedestrian injury crashes and matched controls from 1997 to 2001 data. This effect was attributed to lower vehicle speeds post-installation, with the study controlling for traffic volume and other confounders via . In a natural experimental study of Iranian trunk roads from 2014 to 2019, speed hump installation reduced the severity of road traffic injuries by 77% in intervention sites compared to control sites, as measured by the (AIS) and analyzed using generalized estimating equations to account for clustering and time trends. The intervention involved placing humps at 100-meter intervals, leading to observed speed reductions that correlated with diminished injury outcomes. Broader reviews of , including speed bumps and humps, report crash incidence and severity reductions of 50% or more across multiple implementations, drawing from empirical data in settings where vertical deflections lowered impact speeds in zones. One systematic examination of vertical deflections like speed humps documented a 37.5% drop in accidents following deployment near high-risk areas, emphasizing causal links via pre- and post-installation crash frequency comparisons.
Study/SourceReduction MetricContext/Details
Retting et al. (2003), NIH53-60% lower odds of child injury/deathPedestrian crashes in humped neighborhoods vs. controls, NYC data
Abbasspour et al. (2022), NIH77% lower injury severityTrunk roads with humps vs. controls, AIS scores,
meta-data (2014)≥50% crash incidence/severityUrban vertical deflections, multiple sites
Speed reducer review (2022)37.5% pedestrian accidentsHumps near schools/crossings, frequency analysis

Limitations from Studies

Empirical studies have documented delays in response times attributable to speed humps and bumps. A 2023 field trial involving ambulances across three regions found significant passage delays, ranging from 2.5 to 5.2 seconds per hump depending on design and speed, with delays adding further time in congested scenarios. Analysis of fire apparatus data in , reported average delays of 1.0 to 9.4 seconds per 14-foot hump and 9.2 seconds per 22-foot speed table, potentially extending total response times by minutes over multiple installations. A synthesis of U.S. case studies estimated an overall average of 3.6 seconds of delay per hump for s, highlighting cumulative impacts on streets with dense placements. Vertical traffic calming measures like speed bumps have been associated with elevated risks of rear-end collisions due to abrupt deceleration. Research on short-length humps (under 3 meters) indicated heightened collision potential from sudden braking and inattention, with one simulation-based noting increased rear-end probabilities by up to 20% in heterogeneous flows. A review of geometric effects emphasized that closely spaced or poorly designed bumps exacerbate this by inducing erratic speed profiles, though empirical crash remains context-specific and often confounded by local . Noise pollution intensifies near speed hump installations, as vehicles brake and accelerate sharply. A systematic review of traffic calming cited surveys in Kafr El-Sheikh, , where 73.6% of residents reported heightened vehicular post-installation, corroborated by acoustic measurements in showing decibel increases of 5-10 dB(A) over control segments. Similar findings from documented resident complaints of and from speed tables, while a Malaysian study linked unplanned hump deployments to broader auditory disturbances without offsetting safety gains. Studies reveal limitations in overall safety enhancements, with some vertical deflections failing to yield net reductions. A systematic of raised platforms, including speed bumps, concluded they do not consistently improve outcomes, particularly in high-volume or non-residential areas where speed remains variable. displacement effects further undermine localized benefits; a Greek case in observed a 45.2% local volume drop but a 7% rise in adjacent streets, potentially shifting risks without network-wide mitigation. Vehicle operating costs and integrity suffer from suboptimal designs. Empirical assessments in mixed-traffic environments reported elevated fuel consumption (up to 15% higher per passage) and accelerated wear on suspensions and tires, alongside raveling from repetitive impacts. These drawbacks, noted in reviews of and implementations, underscore that while humps enforce speed compliance, they impose maintenance burdens absent in smoother calming alternatives.

Advantages and Benefits

Pedestrian and Community Safety Gains

Speed bumps and humps achieve safety gains primarily by enforcing lower speeds in areas with high exposure risks, such as residential zones and vicinities, where excessive speeds increase collision lethality due to higher transfer. Empirical data indicate that these devices can reduce average speeds by 20-40% in treated segments, correlating with diminished pedestrian crash frequencies and severities. For instance, a matched case-control analysis of neighborhoods found speed humps linked to a 53-60% reduction in the odds of injury or fatality for child pedestrians struck by vehicles, attributing this to moderated impact forces at lower entry speeds. Targeted studies further quantify crash reductions: in urban settings with speed hump installations, pedestrian-involved crashes declined by 24.45% compared to equivalent untreated sites, alongside a 51.14% drop in total crashes, based on before-after analyses controlling for traffic volume. Similarly, on trunk roads in Ghana, speed humps yielded a 77% decrease in combined fatal, serious, and minor injuries from road traffic collisions over a decade-long period (2011-2020), with effects most pronounced near pedestrian crossing points. These outcomes stem from localized speed suppression within 30 meters of the devices, which disrupts high-speed through-traffic and enhances driver vigilance. In community contexts, such interventions foster broader by deterring cut-through speeding in low-volume residential , thereby protecting vulnerable groups like cyclists and elderly walkers from severe impacts. A of measures, including humps, reported 29-32% average speed reductions yielding up to 67% fewer crashes, emphasizing benefits in mixed-use areas where children and non-motorists predominate. Such gains are particularly evident in before-after implementations where humps replaced unenforced limits, reducing injury risks without relying on behavioral compliance alone. Overall, these devices contribute to neighborhood-level resilience against incursions, prioritizing empirical metrics over perceptual safety alone.

Traffic Flow Modifications

Speed bumps, by design, compel drivers to decelerate and accelerate repeatedly, fostering a characterized by lower average speeds and greater uniformity rather than high-volume throughput. Empirical data from evaluations of 218 speed humps indicate that post-installation 85th speeds typically range from 25 to 27 , representing reductions of approximately 20-23% from pre-implementation levels, which often exceeded 30 . This enforced moderation minimizes speed differentials among vehicles, reducing instances of erratic or that contribute to in residential settings. A key modification arises from volume deterrence: speed bumps discourage through-traffic and rat-running, with studies across 187 installations showing an average 20% reduction in daily traffic volumes, ranging from minimal changes to up to 72% decreases depending on alternative routes. Specific analyses report 18-22% drops in daily vehicles on hump-treated segments, as drivers seek smoother paths elsewhere, thereby reallocating flow to arterials and preserving capacity for local access. In urban neighborhoods, this shift enhances flow quality by prioritizing essential trips over transient volumes, as evidenced by implementations where volumes fell by 130 vehicles per day without exceeding diversion thresholds. Such alterations promote a self-regulating in low-speed environments, where closely spaced humps (e.g., 75-200 m apart) sustain consistent velocities around 15-20 , curtailing cycles that amplify peak-hour variability. Geometric optimizations, like 3.7-4.25 m lengths and 75-100 mm heights, further stabilize this pattern, yielding up to 40-50% speed cuts that align with pedestrian-scale priorities without inducing undue queuing in appropriately scaled streets. Overall, these convert high-speed corridors into deliberate, lower-capacity networks, benefiting livability by filtering out incompatible modes.

Criticisms and Drawbacks

Emergency Response Delays

Speed bumps, as vertical traffic calming devices, compel emergency vehicles such as ambulances and fire apparatus to reduce speed significantly when traversing them, resulting in measurable delays during response operations. Studies indicate average delays ranging from 2.8 to 7.3 seconds per speed hump for fire-rescue vehicles, with variations depending on hump design—parabolic profiles causing greater slowdowns than flat-top variants—and vehicle type. In one analysis of ambulance transit, the presence of speed humps led to lost times of several seconds per instance, as vehicles must decelerate to avoid compromising patient stability or equipment integrity en route to scenes or hospitals. These incremental delays accumulate in neighborhoods with multiple humps, potentially extending overall response times by 10 seconds or more per hump sequence, a factor that emergency services cite as compromising operational efficiency. Fire departments have quantified these impacts through field tests, reporting delays of 1 to 11 seconds per hump based on apparatus weight and hump dimensions—for instance, 14-foot humps averaging 1.0 to 9.4 seconds and 22-foot versions up to 11 seconds. Such findings stem from controlled traversals where emergency vehicles, even when straddling humps or using sirens to clear paths, cannot maintain highway speeds, leading to recommendations against installing humps on primary emergency routes. In jurisdictions like , these delays occur both outbound to incidents and inbound with patients, amplifying risks where response thresholds—often targeted at under 6-7 minutes—face erosion from repeated obstructions. Mitigation strategies, including speed cushions that allow centered passage for wider emergency vehicles or preemptive route rerouting, reduce but do not eliminate delays, with cushions showing minimal impact in some evaluations (under 2 seconds average). Nonetheless, empirical data consistently affirm that speed bumps introduce causal delays via physical deceleration requirements, prioritizing resident speed reduction over unimpeded emergency access—a trade-off scrutinized in traffic engineering syntheses. Local fire officials have opposed hump installations on arterials, projecting cumulative time losses in minutes for multi-hump corridors, underscoring the tension between traffic calming benefits and life-saving urgency.

Vehicle Wear and Economic Costs

Speed bumps impose vertical accelerations and require deceleration, which can contribute to mechanical stress on vehicles, including suspension components, shocks, struts, brakes, and tires. A 2004 study by the (TRL) conducted durability tests involving over 600 passes by various vehicles (cars, taxis, ambulances, buses, minibuses) across road humps at speeds up to 25 , finding no visible damage to components and only temporary changes in suspension geometry (e.g., toe shifts exceeding manufacturer tolerances by up to 1°09' in ambulances, which normalized after further traversals). These forces were comparable to those from everyday road irregularities like potholes, indicating that properly designed humps and compliant speeds do not accelerate wear beyond normal usage. However, a 2016 review of studies from 1985 to 2015 highlighted potential deterioration from repeated traversals, including and wear due to frequent slowing, as well as internal damage from impacts, which shortens component lifespan. Such effects are exacerbated if drivers fail to reduce speed adequately, leading to higher dynamic loads; for instance, improper traversal can strain bushings and systems, prompting earlier replacements. Bus operators have reported elevated maintenance needs, though the TRL analysis attributed observed reductions (e.g., in front suspensions) to routine bedding-in rather than hump-induced degradation. Economic costs to vehicle owners arise primarily from potential repairs and fuel inefficiency. Suspension and tire repairs can cost hundreds to thousands of dollars per incident, with cumulative effects from dense hump installations amplifying expenses over time, though no large-scale quantification exists beyond anecdotal claims from fleet operators. The same review noted added fuel consumption from acceleration-deceleration cycles, increasing operational costs for frequent users like delivery vehicles. Overall, while empirical tests show limited verifiable acceleration of wear under controlled conditions, real-world non-compliance and layout density may impose modest but recurring economic burdens, unsubstantiated by comprehensive cost-benefit analyses specific to private owners.

Noise, Pollution, and Diversion Effects

Speed bumps contribute to elevated noise levels primarily through the mechanical impacts of vehicles traversing them, including tire-pavement interactions, suspension compressions, and engine accelerations following deceleration. Measurements indicate that noise from vehicles crossing speed bumps can rise by 10 to 20 decibels compared to unobstructed travel, with levels equivalent to those produced by heavier vehicles at higher speeds on flat roads. Taller or more abrupt bumps exacerbate this, as drivers brake sharply and accelerate, generating intermittent peaks in sound pressure that disrupt residential quietude more than steady low-speed cruising. While some localized studies report minor overall reductions in average decibel levels from slower traffic volumes (e.g., 77 to 75 dBA in San Jose implementations), these overlook the pulsed, higher-frequency noises from individual crossings, which predominate in human perception of annoyance. Vehicle emissions of pollutants such as (CO), nitrogen oxides (), and (PM) increase substantially at speed bumps due to repeated acceleration-deceleration cycles, which elevate fuel combustion inefficiencies. Research quantifies fuel consumption hikes of 30% to 50% on humped sections relative to smooth roads, with PM emissions surging 2 to 5 times from tire wear, brake friction, and exhaust during idling-like maneuvers. In low-traffic scenarios, these effects amplify, as isolated vehicles expend disproportionate energy per passage, yielding net atmospheric burdens despite volume reductions. Peer-reviewed analyses confirm disproportionate rises for non-catalyst petrol cars, underscoring causal links to incomplete combustion under transient loads. Diversion effects arise when speed bumps deter through-traffic on treated streets, redirecting volumes to adjacent or parallel routes often unprepared for surges in speed or density. Guidelines emphasize area-wide implementations to mitigate this, as localized humps can elevate speeds by 10-20% on alternatives, potentially offsetting gains via displaced crash risks. Empirical observations link such shifts to unintended or higher injury rates on untreated arterials, where drivers compensate by accelerating to maintain trip times, illustrating a classic of piecemeal calming.

Environmental and Broader Impacts

Emissions and Fuel Consumption

Speed bumps induce repeated deceleration and cycles in , which elevate consumption compared to steady-speed travel on unobstructed , as engines operate less efficiently during transient phases. A study analyzing instantaneous traffic emissions found that speed humps significantly increase CO₂, NOₓ, and (PM) emissions, particularly on with low volumes, where the stop-start pattern amplifies generation per vehicle passage. Empirical measurements indicate consumption rises by 30% to 50% for traversing speed humps versus smooth-flow conditions, due to the energy demands of braking and re-acceleration. Local air quality deteriorates near speed bumps, with increasing 2 to 5 times relative to bump-free roads, as vehicles idle or accelerate in proximity, concentrating s. Comparative on-road tests have quantified substantial spikes: CO₂ emissions rose by 90%, by 117%, NOₓ by 195%, and total hydrocarbons by 148% over traffic-calmed segments versus smooth roads. For diesel vehicles, NO₂ emissions can surge by up to 98% when navigating bumps, exacerbating urban levels. These effects are most pronounced in residential or low- areas, where fewer vehicles dilute the per-passage peaks, though overall network-wide impacts may vary with .
PollutantEmission Increase Over Smooth Roads (%)
CO₂90
117
NOₓ195
THC148
This table summarizes results from controlled tests on speed hump traversal. While speed reductions from bumps can lower emissions at higher baseline speeds (e.g., above 50 km/h), the localized inefficiencies often yield net environmental costs in typical deployments below 50 km/h limits.

Urban Planning Considerations

In , speed bumps, also known as speed humps, serve as vertical deflection devices within strategies to reduce vehicle speeds in residential, , and pedestrian-heavy zones, typically targeting 85th speeds of 25-30 through strategic spacing of 260 to 500 feet. Planners integrate them into street designs after assessments confirm excessive speeds or crash risks, often combining them with horizontal measures like lane narrowing or curb extensions to enhance perceptual cues for drivers and shorten distances. Placement requires avoidance of driveways, steep inclines, or high-volume arterials to minimize disruptions and demands, with full-width excluding gutters for . Empirical studies indicate speed humps reduce average daily volumes by varying degrees and lower injury crashes by up to 33% in treated areas, supporting their use in fostering walkable environments. However, they can divert to untreated streets, necessitating neighborhood-wide plans to prevent unintended shifts. Broader considerations include compatibility with ; speed cushions with wheel cutouts accommodate buses while deflecting cars, but overuse may conflict with goals for fluid emergency access or equitable street equity, as response delays of 30 seconds per hump have been linked to potential life losses in high-density settings. Urban designers increasingly view speed bumps as interim tools rather than permanent fixtures, favoring holistic redesigns like narrower roadways that psychologically enforce slower speeds without added pavement wear or retrofit costs.

Alternatives to Speed Bumps

Physical Traffic Calming Options

Physical traffic calming options include vertical and horizontal deflection devices designed to reduce vehicle speeds through geometric changes, often serving as alternatives to abrupt speed bumps for streets requiring smoother flow or emergency access. Vertical deflections like speed humps, cushions, and tables provide gradual changes, while horizontal measures such as chokers and chicanes alter . These devices typically target residential or low-volume with design speeds of 20-35 mph, with effectiveness varying by spacing, height, and configuration; series installations spaced 260-500 feet apart enhance cumulative speed control. Speed humps consist of 12-foot-long, 3-4-inch-high raised sections spanning the roadway, reducing 85th speeds by 6-13 at the device and encouraging 15-20 crossings; studies report 33-48% reductions on treated streets. Speed cushions incorporate gaps in raised rubber or asphalt pads (3 inches high), allowing emergency vehicles to straddle and pass at higher speeds with minimal delay, while achieving 5-7 reductions for standard traffic. Speed tables feature elongated platforms (22 feet long with 10-foot flat tops, 3-6 inches high), suitable for crosswalks, yielding 4-11 speed drops and 36-64% fewer crashes. Raised crosswalks and intersections elevate areas or entire junctions to level (3-4 inches high with 5% or gentler ramps), slowing approaches by 1-5 and improving . Horizontal deflections narrow or curve roadways to induce caution. Roadway chokers use 6-8-foot curb extensions or islands to constrict lanes (maintaining 12-14 feet for apparatus), reducing speeds by 1-4 mph and shortening crossings. Chicanes form S-shaped paths via alternating extensions, achieving 3-9 mph reductions within the segment and up to 20% volume decreases on cut-through routes. Lateral shifts realign lanes around medians, cutting speeds by about 5 mph on collectors. Corner bulbouts extend sidewalks 6-8 feet into intersections, yielding 1-3.5 mph slowdowns and enhancing turning visibility. Roundabouts at intersections moderate entry speeds, substantially lowering severe crash rates per NCHRP analyses.
Device TypeTypical Speed Reduction (85th Percentile)Key Advantages
Speed Hump6-13 mphHigh crash reduction (33-48%)
Speed Cushion5-7 mphReduced emergency delays
1-4 mph refuge space
3-9 mphVolume diversion up to 20%

Non-Physical Strategies

Non-physical strategies for traffic calming focus on altering driver behavior through , perceptual cues, education, and technology, avoiding structural changes to the roadway. These methods leverage psychological, legal, and informational influences to encourage voluntary speed compliance, often proving more cost-effective and less disruptive to emergency vehicles than physical devices. Effectiveness depends on consistent application and public of enforcement certainty, with studies indicating sustained speed reductions when combined with visibility and sanctions. Enforcement measures, such as automated speed cameras and patrols, directly deter speeding by imposing fines or penalties. Automated speed enforcement has demonstrated reductions in mean speeds by 10-14% and crashes by up to 28% at monitored sites, with effects persisting post-installation due to perceived of detection. Dynamic speed signs, which display real-time speed to drivers, achieve average speed drops of 2-5 , particularly effective in school zones where 85th percentile speeds decrease by 3-6 . Visible campaigns, including trailers and variable message , further amplify compliance by increasing drivers' awareness of monitoring. Perceptual or "psychological" techniques manipulate drivers' visual and cognitive cues to induce caution without physical barriers. Removing center white lines or applying colored surfacing, such as red brick patterns, narrows perceived lane width and reduces average speeds by 4-8 , with greater impact on faster drivers, as tested in simulator and field trials. Gateway clusters and markings at entries create an of increased risk, lowering entry speeds by up to 6 in residential areas. These low-cost interventions rely on drivers' instinctive responses to ambiguous or unfamiliar environments, though long-term efficacy requires minimal maintenance to preserve perceptual effects. Education and awareness campaigns promote voluntary adherence by highlighting speeding risks and consequences. Targeted programs, such as those using media and school outreach, reduce average speeds by 2-4 km/h among habitual speeders when paired with enforcement, but standalone efforts show limited sustained impact due to drivers' tendency to revert to prior habits. Public messaging emphasizing crash data and fines, as in initiatives, improves short-term compliance rates by 10-20% in high-risk zones, though integration with visible enforcement is essential for lasting behavioral change. Overall, non-physical approaches excel in flexibility and minimal infrastructure demands but demand ongoing commitment to enforcement and evaluation for verifiable speed reductions.

Regional Variations and Regulations

Usage in North America

In , vertical deflection devices for predominantly take the form of speed humps rather than sharper speed bumps, with the latter generally confined to low-speed private settings such as parking lots. Speed humps feature a rounded, elongated profile—typically 3 to 4 inches high and 10 to 14 feet long—designed to reduce vehicle speeds to 10-15 on residential streets while minimizing vehicle discomfort compared to abrupt bumps that enforce 2-10 limits. This distinction aligns with guidelines from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), which recommend speed humps for public roadways to achieve gradual deceleration without excessive jarring. The modern speed hump originated in the United States in 1953, when physicist Arthur Holly Compton installed the first such device at to curb campus speeding, marking an early empirical application of physical barriers for velocity control. Adoption expanded in the 1970s amid growing efforts, with over 120 North American jurisdictions implementing vertical deflections by 1978, often in response to resident petitions for safer neighborhood streets. By the , speed humps had become standard in suburban and urban residential areas, particularly on roads with posted limits of 30 or below, excluding arterial thoroughfares to avoid emergency response delays. Regulatory frameworks in the U.S. and Canada emphasize localized decision-making, guided by federal resources like the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) ePrimer on traffic calming, which advises against speed bumps on public roads due to heightened vehicle wear and noise. States and municipalities, such as those following ITE protocols, require engineering assessments including traffic volume thresholds (typically under 3,000 vehicles daily) and signage for humps spaced 300-600 feet apart. In Canada, similar standards prevail, with research from the 1990s onward refining hump geometry for optimal speed reduction around 30 km/h, as seen in off-road testing protocols. Recent implementations, like those in Arlington, Virginia, demonstrate efficacy, yielding a 43% drop in vehicles exceeding 20 mph post-installation. Variations include speed cushions—segmented humps allowing smoother passage for wider emergency vehicles—which have gained traction in North American cities since the early 2000s, particularly in busier locales to balance calming with transit efficiency. Overall, usage prioritizes empirical speed moderation in low-volume contexts, with installation costs averaging $2,000-3,000 per hump, funded via local budgets or grants, though critics note potential equity issues in uneven neighborhood deployment.

Implementation in Europe and the UK

In the , speed humps—often termed "road humps"—were first installed on public as devices in 1983, following experimental use on private roads. Their adoption accelerated under the Highways (Road Humps) Regulations , which standardized dimensions to include a minimum of mm, height between 25 mm and 100 mm, and specific profiles such as round-top or sinusoidal shapes to balance speed reduction with vehicle handling. These measures are permitted on single- or dual-carriageway roads with speed limits of 30 or below, excluding principal roads, and must include , lighting in non-20 mph zones, and consultation with emergency services. By 2019, approximately 42,000 speed humps were in place nationwide, primarily in residential and urban areas to enhance safety. Implementation guidelines emphasize integration within broader schemes, as outlined in the Department for Transport's Local Transport Note 1/07, which recommends spacing humps 50-100 meters apart for optimal speed control without excessive vehicle disruption. Local authorities retain discretion in placement, often prioritizing areas with high pedestrian activity or accident rates, though opposition from motorists and bus operators has led to refinements like speed cushions—offset humps allowing smoother passage for larger vehicles. Across continental Europe, speed bumps gained traction earlier, with the first recorded installation in , , in 1970 as part of experimental urban . Adoption varies by country but aligns with the Union's Safe System approach, which promotes physical to enforce lower speeds in built-up areas, as detailed in the Road Safety Action Plan. In , widespread deployment began around 1990 to address elevated urban pedestrian fatalities, reducing speeds effectively in residential zones though prompting debates on emergency response delays. , , and the have integrated humps into extensive networks in cities like , , and , often combining them with 30 km/h zones and narrower lanes; standards typically specify heights of 50-100 mm and lengths of 2-4 meters to minimize vehicle damage while achieving 10-20 km/h reductions. European countries frequently employ variants like speed cushions or tables, which permit buses and cycles to pass unimpeded, reflecting adaptations for public transit-heavy urban environments. National regulations differ—e.g., and mandate engineering assessments for hump placement—but harmonization occurs through directives emphasizing empirical safety gains, with studies confirming 20-40% drops in injury accidents post-installation in calmed streets. has expanded since the 1990s, driven by pedestrian protection goals, though rural or high-speed contexts limit use to avoid diverting traffic to unsafe alternatives.

Adoption in Developing Countries

Speed bumps and humps have seen widespread adoption in developing countries as low-cost measures, particularly in urban and peri-urban areas with high volumes and limited budgets for engineered . In nations such as , these devices are commonly deployed on both urban streets and rural roads to curb excessive vehicle speeds amid mixed traffic conditions involving motorcycles, s, and heavy vehicles. Their appeal stems from minimal material requirements—often using local , or even improvised dirt mounds—allowing implementation by local authorities or communities without advanced expertise. Case studies illustrate varied applications across regions. In , speed humps installed on trunk s passing through towns from 2011 to 2020 were associated with reduced severity of injuries in es, though overall crash frequency remained influenced by non-compliance and poor . Community-led installations, such as or rope-based humps, have emerged in sub-Saharan locales to address immediate safety gaps on unpaved or poorly maintained s. In , including , rapid has spurred municipal adoption to mitigate congestion-related risks, with devices integrated into residential zones despite challenges from heavy truck . Asian contexts, like and the , similarly favor humps for school zones and markets, where pedestrian exposure is acute. Empirical evidence supports moderate effectiveness in speed reduction and crash mitigation. Studies in low- and middle-income countries indicate that properly spaced humps can lower speeds by 10-20 /h within 30 meters, correlating with fewer injuries near installation sites. However, outcomes depend on geometric standards; deviations in (typically 7-10 cm) or profile lead to inconsistent deceleration and potential damage. A review of devices in developing settings highlights their role in but notes gaps in longitudinal data, with benefits most pronounced in low-volume residential areas rather than high-speed arterials. Adoption faces significant hurdles, including substandard construction and maintenance, which exacerbate risks. In many areas, humps degrade rapidly due to poor materials and overloading by informal vehicles, creating uneven surfaces that cause skidding or failures, particularly during rainy seasons. They also concentrate from brake wear and tire abrasion, forming hotspots that pose health risks via dust inhalation or runoff in densely populated urban slums. delays are a noted concern, as non-standard designs force detours or slow responses in resource-scarce settings with few ambulances. Placement is sometimes driven by motives rather than , with uneven enforcement leading drivers to evade humps via sidewalks, endangering pedestrians. Guidelines for standardized installation remain underutilized, underscoring the need for context-specific engineering to balance efficacy against .

References

  1. [1]
  2. [2]
    Speed Hump - NACTO
    Speed humps are parabolic vertical traffic calming devices, 3-4 inches high and 12-14 feet wide, intended to slow traffic to 15-20 mph.
  3. [3]
    Module 3: Toolbox of Individual Traffic Calming Measures Part 2
    A speed hump is typically 12 feet in length (in the direction of travel), between 3 and 4 inches in height, and is intended for use on a public roadway. A speed ...
  4. [4]
  5. [5]
    First speed bump - Historic Towns Of America
    The first speed bump in the United States was installed in Chatham, New Jersey in 1906. Workers raised crosswalks five inches to reduce drivers' speed.
  6. [6]
    Speed Management Countermeasures: More than Just Speed Humps
    Feb 1, 2017 · Studies show speed humps can be effective at reducing speeds by nearly 10 mph. ... (See page 2 to learn the difference between speed humps and ...
  7. [7]
    A Matched Case–Control Study Evaluating the Effectiveness of ... - NIH
    We found that speed humps were associated with a 53% to 60% reduction in the odds of injury or death among children struck by an automobile in their ...
  8. [8]
  9. [9]
    Why Municipalities are Moving Away from Speed Humps - Radarsign
    Speed humps are expensive, slow emergency vehicles, reduce property values, increase noise, cause vehicle wear, and increase air pollution.
  10. [10]
    Effects of Traffic Calming Measures on Motor Vehicle Speed and ...
    Traffic calming can reduce average vehicle speed and traffic volume, with an average volume reduction of 20% for speed humps and 29% for traffic circles.
  11. [11]
    [PDF] Effectiveness of Traffic Calming Measures in Salt Lake City - SLC.gov
    Ewing et al. (2013) studied safe- ty countermeasures of speed humps, implemented in New York City and found that fatal and injury accidents decreased by 33% on ...
  12. [12]
    Science Behind Speed Bumps: They Control Traffic + Save Lives
    Speed bumps are raised pavement sections that force drivers to slow down, reducing speeds by up to 40% and accident risk by 50%. They use physics to create ...Missing: mechanism | Show results with:mechanism
  13. [13]
    ⇒ The Science Behind Speed Bumps And Road Safety ⇒ Unimat Traffic Miami Florida
    ### Summary of Mechanism by Which Speed Bumps Reduce Vehicle Speed
  14. [14]
    Physics of Speed Bumps - APlusPhysics
    Nov 6, 2016 · When going over the speed bump, you experience an impulse, equivalent to the average force applied to you multiplied by the time during which it is applied.
  15. [15]
    [PDF] DelDOT Traffic Calming Design Manual - 2025
    Apr 1, 2025 · Speed: Vertical deflection encourages motorists to reduce their speeds through the sections of the street where speed humps are located. Speed ...
  16. [16]
    Speed Bumps Vs. Speed Humps: Difference And Uses
    Speed humps are designed to reduce speed to between 15–25 miles per hour, while speed bumps aim to decrease speed to 5–10 miles per hour.
  17. [17]
    guide-choosing-speed-bumps-and-speed-humps
    Dec 5, 2024 · Speed bumps are small, raised areas that force drivers to slow down significantly, making them ideal for parking lots, alleys, and private ...
  18. [18]
    Speed Humps - City of Tucson
    Recent speed hump studies have shown a 40-60% reduction in vehicles exceeding the speed limit.
  19. [19]
    [PDF] SPEED MANAGEMENT COUNTERMEASURES
     Speed Humps.​​ Generally located on residential streets or other low-speed roads, these raised pavement structures force motorists to slow down to a safe speed ...
  20. [20]
    [PDF] CITY OF CALEXICO
    Speed Humps are used on public street in residential areas to reduce traffic speeds. Speed Humps are typically 12 feet wide and between 3 to 4 inches high.
  21. [21]
    Module 2: Traffic Calming Basics | FHWA
    2.1 Traffic Calming Definition​​ These objectives are typically achieved by reducing vehicle speeds or volumes on a single street or a street network.
  22. [22]
    Traffic Calming - Boiling Springs, NC
    Traffic Calming refers to devices intended to slow or reduce vehicle traffic. Learn more about the Town's traffic calming efforts.
  23. [23]
  24. [24]
  25. [25]
    Speed Cushions - City of Mesa
    Speed cushions are a type of speed hump that allow larger vehicles, especially fire trucks, to straddle them without significantly slowing down.
  26. [26]
    A Little Speed Bump History - - Traffic Spikes
    Jul 10, 2021 · An early form of speed bumps was implemented in Chatham, New Jersey in 1906. Workers raised crosswalks five inches to reduce drivers' speed.
  27. [27]
    Who Invented Speed Bumps? Interesting History Explained
    Apr 28, 2025 · In 1953, Arthur Holly Compton (a famous scientist) invented this smart and modern gadget. He was the first person to notice the gap in road ...The Inventor of Today's Speed... · Evolution of Speed Bumps...
  28. [28]
    On its 40th anniversary, do speed bumps still serve their purpose?
    Oct 12, 2023 · 22 April 1906 was the first known speed bump added to a road in Chatham, New Jersey. Its aim was to reduce the speed of motor vehicles that had ...
  29. [29]
    Oppenheimer and the Speed Bump Are Unexpectedly Linked
    Jul 22, 2023 · And if you're wondering what all of this has to do with cars, well, Arthur Holly Compton also invented the modern speed bump.
  30. [30]
    Ultimate Guide to Speed Bumps | Oxford Plastics
    Who invented speed bumps? Physicist, Arthur Holly Compton, invented 'traffic control bumps' in 1953, which are now known as speed bumps. He initially invented ...
  31. [31]
    A Brief History of Speed Humps and Other Traffic Calming
    Arthur Holly Compton, a renowned physicist, is credited with the invention of “traffic control bumps” in 1953, which we now commonly refer to as speed bumps.
  32. [32]
    [PDF] Updated Guidelines for the Design and Application of Speed Humps
    The construction procedures should contain detailed working drawings showing development of the desired profile and allowable tolerances for speed hump height.
  33. [33]
    Rubber Speed Bumps vs. Traditional Ones: Which Are Better?
    Apr 23, 2025 · Traditional speed bumps are permanent traffic-calming structures made from asphalt, concrete, or metal. These bumps are constructed by layering ...
  34. [34]
    Long Speed Bump Rated 66000 LBS Load Capacity, 8 Bolt Spikes ...
    Industrial Rubber Speed Bump: Speed bumps are made of industrial-grade premium rubber and can hold a load of 66,000 lbs, strong enough. The Speed bump for ...
  35. [35]
    Speed Bump & Humps Installation: Step-by-Step Guide
    May 27, 2025 · Prefabricated speed bumps composed of rubber or plastic are frequently utilized for rapid and simple installation. Additionally, you will need a ...
  36. [36]
    Speed Bumps - A Complete Guide - RS Components
    Jan 11, 2023 · Speed humps are almost always made from plastic or rubber. This can sometimes include recycled materials. They are designed to be secured to the ...
  37. [37]
    Introduction to the construction method of the speed bump
    The speed bumps are installed on the asphalt pavement: 1. Arrange the speed bumps neatly into a straight line (black and yellow), and place a semicircular row ...
  38. [38]
    Speed Bump - Standard Dimensions & Drawings
    Jun 11, 2023 · Speed bumps can be made from a variety of materials, including asphalt, concrete, rubber, and plastic. However, asphalt speed bumps are the most ...
  39. [39]
    The Ultimate Guide to Speed Bump Regulations UK
    May 27, 2024 · The height of speed bumps must also be a minimum of 25mm but no more than 100mm at the highest point. Additionally, no vertical face of any ...
  40. [40]
    Speed Bump Regulations | BarrierMart
    All speed bumps must be at least 900mm in length. The minimum height for a speed bump is 25mm at its highest point. The maximum height for a speed bump is 100mm ...Missing: width | Show results with:width
  41. [41]
  42. [42]
    Speed Bumps VS Speed Humps: Whats the Difference?
    Nov 10, 2023 · Speed humps are slightly smaller and longer, working best at 10-15 MPH, while speed bumps are for 2-10 MPH. Speed humps are often in series,  ...
  43. [43]
  44. [44]
  45. [45]
    [PDF] A Comparative Study of Speed Humps, Speed Slots and ... - NACTO
    Due to concerns that speed humps influence response times and passenger comfort of emergency response vehicles, modified designs of speed humps were created.
  46. [46]
    [PDF] Investigating the Effectiveness of Traffic Calming Strategies on ...
    The traffic calming devices presented in the literature review did reduce vehicle speeds, traffic volumes and crash rates. Speed humps and speed tables (which ...
  47. [47]
  48. [48]
    Speed Cushion - NACTO
    Speed cushions are either speed humps or speed tables that include wheel cutouts to allow large vehicles to pass unaffected, while reducing passenger car ...
  49. [49]
    Analysis of the Factors Influencing Speed Cushion Effectiveness in ...
    According to [45], speed cushions are largely more effective than speed humps for several reasons: they are cost-effective [45,51], decrease speeds down to 10 ...
  50. [50]
    The Dimensions of Speed Cushions
    Common speed cushion dimensions are: length 8-10 feet (2000-3000 mm), width 6-7 feet (1800-2100 mm), and height 3 inches (65 mm).
  51. [51]
    [PDF] Special Specification 5041 Speed Cushions
    Furnish materials conforming to the following: 2.1. Coarse Aggregate. Use gravel, crushed stone, or combination of both, that is retained on No. 10 sieve, ...
  52. [52]
    [PDF] Rubber Speed Cushions - Traffic Logix
    Each module is bolted into the pavement with 7” rust resistant bolts, washers and special 7” plastic anchors. The tongue and groove modules greatly assist in ...
  53. [53]
    [PDF] Speed Hump/Cushion Program - City of Santa Clarita
    Apr 23, 2024 · Speed cushions are designed to discourage speeding. Speed Cushion Installation Requirements ... MATERIAL - 100% RECYCLED SYNTHETIC AND NATURAL ...
  54. [54]
    [PDF] Traffic calming — speed cushion schemes - TRL
    Speed cushions are traffic calming measures. Their width, length, and gradients affect speeds; narrower cushions may not reduce speed enough in 20 mph zones.
  55. [55]
  56. [56]
    Vertical Displacement: Speed Humps and Tables
    Speed tables are asphalt or rubber mounds covering the full roadway width, modified speed humps with a flat top, and are preferred over speed humps.Missing: differences | Show results with:differences
  57. [57]
    Traffic Calming Program (Formerly Speed Hump Petition) | Titusville ...
    Traffic calming reduces vehicle speeds/volumes to improve safety and livability. It aims to increase quality of life by reducing traffic on neighborhood ...<|separator|>
  58. [58]
    Rubber Speed Tables | Slow Vehicle Speeds - Traffic Logix
    They help to keep traffic flowing but at a safer pace. Many cities prefer speed tables over speed humps for the calmer, smoother experience they offer drivers.Missing: definition | Show results with:definition
  59. [59]
    [PDF] Do Speed Tables Improve Safety? | NACTO
    Aug 27, 2003 · The study found that total crashes dropped by 38% and total injuries decreased by 93 % after speed tables were installed. The total changes are ...
  60. [60]
    Effectiveness of speed tables installed singularly in home zones on ...
    Mar 25, 2025 · The speed survey data and the results of statistical analyses carried out as part of this study showed that speed tables cause gradual slowing ...Missing: empirical | Show results with:empirical
  61. [61]
    How it works - Actibump EN
    Actibump is a smart traffic solution which collects real-time information about vehicle numbers, air quality, noise levels and vibration.Missing: dynamic | Show results with:dynamic
  62. [62]
    Active dynamic speed bump - Actibump EN
    Sep 29, 2023 · Passively dynamic speed bumps are designed in a way that heavy vehicles can pass almost without discomfort, similar to a speed cushion. However, ...
  63. [63]
    Adaptive Speed Bump With Vehicle Identification for Intelligent ...
    Jun 24, 2022 · The idea is to make the road bump operate adaptively based on the identification or driving speed of the incoming vehicle.Missing: calming | Show results with:calming
  64. [64]
    US20130209169A1 - Height adjustable speed bump - Google Patents
    The present invention relates to a height adjustable speed bump for controlling speed of vehicles when placed on roadways and for serving as a barrier when ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  65. [65]
  66. [66]
    Intelligent Traffic Control with Smart Speed Bumps - ResearchGate
    In this paper, we introduce the Smart Speed Bump (SSBump), a novel traffic calming solution that leverages the Internet of Things (IoT) and innovative non- ...
  67. [67]
    Active speed bump launched at Intertraffic now available world-wide
    Mar 28, 2022 · The Actibump is an active speed bump that uses a hatch that lowers when speeding vehicles approach, and remains level for compliant drivers.
  68. [68]
    [PDF] Impacts of Traffic Calming - NACTO
    Of all traffic calming measures, speed humps have the greatest impact on 85th percentile speeds, reducing them by an average of more than 7 mph or 20 percent.
  69. [69]
    Assessing Multifaceted Effects of Speed Humps and Bumps
    The reduction percentages were 41.65% for speed humps, 73.52% for speed bumps, and 86.27% for triple bumps. This indicates the effectiveness of these traffic ...Missing: peer | Show results with:peer
  70. [70]
    Optimum design of speed hump based on empirical data
    Jul 28, 2020 · Traffic calming techniques are extensively used as safety tools to reduce the speed of motorised vehicles along any type of paved road.
  71. [71]
    Effects of speed humps on vehicle speed and pedestrian crashes in ...
    This work finds that the speed reductions that occurred near speed humps were gradual and influential ±30 m from their locations.Missing: empirical | Show results with:empirical
  72. [72]
    A large-scale study on the speed-calming effect of speed humps
    Sep 12, 2025 · From the analysis of car speed before passing concrete speed bumps, it was found that speed bumps can reduce speeds by 80.17%. The car speed ...
  73. [73]
    Do speed bumps really decrease traffic speed? An Italian experience
    The results show that in one third of the cases the 85th percentile of speed measured at the speed bumps is higher than the posted speed limit (50 km/h) and an ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  74. [74]
    Influential factors on speed reduction at vertical deflection devices in ...
    Additionally, speed humps achieved a 50 %–75 % reduction in the speed, whereas speed table resulted in a reduction ranging from 10 % to 65 % (Obregón-Biosca, ...
  75. [75]
    [PDF] A review of effectiveness of speed reducing devices with focus on ...
    Due to faulty design of speed humps, the road user approaching towards the speed hump has to decrease the speed instantly creating sudden deceleration of the ...<|separator|>
  76. [76]
    Evaluating the Effectiveness of Road Humps in Reducing Vehicle ...
    This paper evaluated the effectiveness of different types of road humps in reducing the speed of vehicles at a university campus.
  77. [77]
    Effect of speed humps on injury consequences on trunk roads ... - NIH
    Sep 26, 2022 · Speed humps reduced the severity of road traffic injuries by 77% in intervention towns compared to control towns after installation.<|separator|>
  78. [78]
    transportation investigation on north american traffic calming device ...
    Reductions in the incidence and severity of crashes of 50 percent or more are frequently reported, as summarized in Table 2. However, most traffic calming ...
  79. [79]
    Effect of Speed Humps on Ambulance Delay - PMC - NIH
    Jan 12, 2023 · In the present study, trials with speed bumps in three different regions showed a significant delay in ambulances passing speed humps, depending ...
  80. [80]
    [PDF] Offset Speed Tables for Reduced Emergency Response Delay
    In 1991 the City of Portland's Office of Transportation (PDOT) undertook a study of speed humps in response to public demand for relief from the excessive and ...
  81. [81]
    Module 5: Effects of Traffic Calming Measures on Non-Personal ...
    The city found using speed cushions instead of speed humps results in a savings of almost 13 seconds per typical roadway segment.Missing: modern | Show results with:modern
  82. [82]
    Full article: Effects of speed hump on vehicle performance in the ...
    Nov 9, 2022 · The authors suggested that the short hump length leads to sudden deceleration before the humps and elevates rear-end collision risk.
  83. [83]
    An Impact Assessment of Speed Humps' Geometric Characteristics ...
    Speed humps are a common traffic-calming strategy for mitigating crash frequency and crash severity, especially in residential areas and around pedestrian ...
  84. [84]
    Beyond Speed Reduction: A Systematic Literature Review of Traffic ...
    This systematic literature review examines the multifaceted impacts of traffic-calming measures—from speed limit reductions to physical infrastructure and ...
  85. [85]
  86. [86]
    Effectiveness of raised safety platforms: a systematic review of ...
    Studies have found that speed bumps are not effective in improving safety. ... limits, speed humps (4.2 m) are more appropriate. •. Length of the ramp: 1.8 ...
  87. [87]
  88. [88]
    Effects of speed humps on vehicle speed and pedestrian crashes in ...
    Speed humps reduce vehicle speed within ±30m, cause fewer pedestrian crashes, and reduce pedestrian injury severity, especially on major roads.
  89. [89]
    Evaluating the effectiveness of speed humps and rumble strips in ...
    This study shows that installing speed humps and rumbles strips significant. Previous research showed that the likelihood of a fatal pedestrian crash is less ...
  90. [90]
    Effect of speed humps on injury consequences on trunk roads ...
    This study examined the effect of speed humps on the severity of injuries during RTCs on trunk roads passing through towns in Ghana from 2011 to 2020.
  91. [91]
    Evaluating the effectiveness of speed humps and rumble strips ... - NIH
    Apr 28, 2025 · Speed humps, for example, have been shown to reduce crashes involving public transport vehicles by over 36% and all crashes by 20% [7].
  92. [92]
    Systematic review on quantifying pedestrian injury when evaluating ...
    Traffic calming successfully decreased speeding in either direction, between 29% and 32%, which resulted in a 67% decrease in pedestrian crashes. Dedicated bus ...
  93. [93]
    [PDF] impact of traffic-calming measures on fire-rescue response
    • Response time delays due to traffic-calming measures are experienced both en route to emergency events as well as during transport of patients to hospitals.
  94. [94]
    [PDF] Traffic Calming-Speed Humps Effect on Emergency Response Times
    The results of their research found that, traffic circles caused a delay of 1.3 to 10.7 seconds, 14 foot humps caused delays of 1.0 to 9.4 seconds, and 22 foot ...
  95. [95]
    [PDF] Effect of Speed Humps on Ambulance Delay
    Jan 12, 2023 · The study aims to determine the delay times alone and queue delay time of ambulances passing through speed humps. Methods: Three types of ...
  96. [96]
    [PDF] Speed Management and Emergency Response—A Synthesis Study
    For emergency response, vertical deflection measures (such as speed humps/bumps) many emergency personnel have concern with delays that increase response ...
  97. [97]
  98. [98]
    [PDF] Usage and impacts of speed humps on vehicles: A review
    Nov 14, 2016 · Traffic calming measures helps in the reduction of fatal injuries and accidents, when implemented may cause problems for emergency services ...
  99. [99]
    [PDF] PROS AND CONS OF SPEED BUMPS
    Speed bumps may reduce speed, but can cause traffic diversion, increased noise, and may impede emergency vehicles. They are also self-enforcing and may reduce ...
  100. [100]
    [PDF] Traffic Calming - ASU Center for Problem-Oriented Policing
    San Jose found that average noise levels fell from 77 to 75 A-rated decibels (dBA) after speed humps were installed. Boulder, CO, conducted what may be the most ...
  101. [101]
    The effect of speed bumps and humps on the concentrations of CO ...
    May 7, 2025 · In specific, speed humps have been found to increase the fuel consumptions of vehicles by 30%-50% compared with those vehicles moving at smooth ...
  102. [102]
    Externalities on vehicle speed, pollutant emissions and fuel ...
    [12] analyzing different speed bumps structures. Their results showed that the air pollution with particulate matter increases by 2–5 times, compared to roads ...
  103. [103]
    The Effect of Speed Humps on Instantaneous Traffic Emissions - MDPI
    We found that speed humps significantly promote the generation of pollutants when the number of vehicles on a lane is low.
  104. [104]
    [PDF] The impacts of traffic calming measures on vehicle exhaust emissions
    The results of the study clearly indicate that traffic calming measures increase the emissions of some pollutants from passenger cars. For petrol non-catalyst,.
  105. [105]
    [PDF] Quantitying the Effects of Traffic Calming on Emissions Using on ...
    When traffic-calmed results were compared to a smooth non-calmed road, there were substantial increases in CO2 (90%), CO (117%), NOx. (195%) and THC (148%).
  106. [106]
    Articles and Scientific studies about old Speed Bumps - SmartBumps
    There has been a lot of research about the speed bumps and their effects. They are efficient: they cut by half the deaths and serious injuries, and that is ...
  107. [107]
    Traffic Calming Strategies - Global Designing Cities Initiative
    Speed humps are formed by raising sections of the road in a sinusoidal shape, typically 10–15 cm high and 4–6 m long. The dimensions can be tailored to match ...<|separator|>
  108. [108]
    Traffic Calming Services USA | Urban Crossroads
    Psychological Impact: Road design influences driver perception. For instance, narrower roads can create a sense of constraint, encouraging slower speeds.
  109. [109]
    The Future Of Installing Speed Bumps In Residential Areas
    Jun 25, 2024 · Urban planners can prioritize pedestrian-friendly infrastructure, such as wider sidewalks, pedestrian islands, and protected bike lanes, to ...
  110. [110]
    [PDF] Traffic Calming Guide - Caltrans
    Speed Reduction: The FHWA cited 7 studies that ranged from a 2 MPH to 7 MPH speed reduction. This countermeasure is most effective when paired with enforcement ...<|separator|>
  111. [111]
    Speed Management - NHTSA
    Speed management includes road design, setting safe limits, enforcement, communication, and local coordination to reduce speeding-related crashes.
  112. [112]
    Measures for Managing Speed - Institute of Transportation Engineers
    Enforcement is critical to achieving a safe use of roads, compliance with speed limits, and ensuring overall movement at a safe speed. According to NHTSA, more ...
  113. [113]
    [PDF] Speed Safety Cameras (SSC) Transportation Research Synthesis
    The research indicates that SSCs are an effective countermeasure for reducing motorist speeds. • Mean speed: Most studies cited a 10-14% reduction on lower ...
  114. [114]
    [PDF] Effectiveness of Dynamic Speed Feedback Signs, Volume I - ROSA P
    DSFSs are effective in reducing mean speeds, with an estimated 4 mph reduction for passenger vehicles and 2-4 mph across all vehicle types.
  115. [115]
    [PDF] Long-Term Effectiveness of Dynamic Speed Monitoring Displays ...
    The study found a statistically significant decrease in overall vehicle speed immediately after the installation of the DSMD signs. The average speed reduction ...
  116. [116]
    Traffic Enforcement and Education | City of Fort Lauderdale, FL
    Fort Lauderdale uses education classes, police enforcement, radar speed signs, radar speed trailers, and variable message signs for traffic enforcement.
  117. [117]
    Mind games force drivers to slow down | UK news | The Guardian
    Nov 5, 2005 · Removing white lines and painting roads different colours can trick motorists into safety, say researchers.Missing: methods | Show results with:methods
  118. [118]
    'Psychological' traffic calming - TRL
    TRL has developed and tested alternative traffic calming techniques that make greater use of psychological (non-physical) measures.Missing: methods | Show results with:methods
  119. [119]
    404 File not Found - Strathprints
    No readable text found in the HTML.<|separator|>
  120. [120]
    Impact of traffic campaigns on the average speed of vehicles on ...
    The traffic campaign was effective in reducing the average vehicle speed by drivers who usually traveled above the allowed speed in the analyzed segments.
  121. [121]
    Saving Lives Through Enforcement and Education - Florida ... - FDOT
    Jul 14, 2025 · FDOT aims to reduce the risk of speed-related crashes by leveraging the use of enhanced enforcement of speed limits and public safety messaging about the ...
  122. [122]
    How Public Education Improves Automated Traffic Enforcement
    Sep 12, 2025 · Improved Compliance Rates – Programs that launch with broad communication campaigns consistently see faster reductions in speeding and red-light ...
  123. [123]
    5. Countermeasures | FHWA - Department of Transportation
    The materials used for a temporary speed management countermeasure often include delineators, precast concrete or plastic curbing, removable rubber speed humps, ...
  124. [124]
    Do speed humps make streets safer? - WBEZ Chicago
    Dec 3, 2021 · Speed humps have been criticized for their aesthetics and for causing trucks and larger vehicles to make more noise when traversing them. Some ...Missing: controversies | Show results with:controversies
  125. [125]
    [PDF] geometric design of speed humps - Bibliothèque et Archives Canada
    The purpose of this study was to help develop geometrïc design standards for speed humps in Canada. Off-road tests were c h e d out on several speed humps.
  126. [126]
    All Hail the Humble Speed Hump, the Best Cheap Traffic-Safety Fix
    Aug 5, 2025 · A 2020 study of South Korea found that speed humps slowed vehicle speeds by 18.4% to 24%. The Federal Highway Administration, which oversees ...Missing: modern | Show results with:modern
  127. [127]
    [PDF] Traffic Calming Speed Humps and Speed Cushions - NACTO
    Traffic calming measures, like speed humps and cushions, aim to reduce driver speed in urban areas, improving safety for all users.
  128. [128]
    Speed bumps turn 40! ROB HULL asks: are the traffic-slowing ...
    Oct 8, 2023 · Speed bumps originate back to 1906 America, but the first installed on a British road as a traffic calming measure came in 1983.
  129. [129]
    The Highways (Road Humps) Regulations 1999 - Legislation.gov.uk
    Status: · 1.Citation and commencement · 2.Interpretation · 3.Consultation about road hump proposals · 4.Nature, dimensions and location of road humps · 5.
  130. [130]
    [PDF] Speed control humps - Scotland, England and Wales - TSRGD
    In England and Wales, road humps may be used along single carriageway and dual carriageway roads providing there is a 30mph speed limit and the road is not a ...
  131. [131]
    [PDF] Traffic Calming - GOV.UK
    Jul 2, 2019 · ... Impact of road humps on vehicles and their occupants. TRL Report 614. Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne. Kennedy J, Gorell R ...
  132. [132]
    Bump in the road: Motorists face more than 42,000 speed humps in ...
    Jul 18, 2019 · Speed bumps were first introduced in the UK in 1983, however, their origins date back to the early 1900s in New Jersey, USA where they were ...
  133. [133]
    Speed bumps - Traffic calming measures in the UK - The AA
    Dec 7, 2017 · They also have a maximum height of 100mm, but they're usually not as tall as speed bumps.Missing: standards | Show results with:standards<|separator|>
  134. [134]
    40 Years of Speed Bumps: Are They Effective? - Autologics
    Oct 31, 2023 · The first speed bump in Europe was installed in Delft in the Netherlands in 1970. The idea finally came to Britain in 1983 under the Highways ( ...
  135. [135]
    [PDF] REDUCING SPEEDING IN EUROPE
    This report is the 36th PIN Flash report on reducing speeding in Europe, covering 32 countries and is part of the Road Safety Performance Index program.
  136. [136]
    Road design - European Commission
    Physical measures such as speed humps can force speed reduction [44], but can meet with opposition from bus and emergency vehicle drivers as well as from ...
  137. [137]
    Europe Speed Humps Market By Application: Future Trends and ...
    May 31, 2025 · Countries such as the UK, Germany, and France are experiencing significant demand for these traffic-calming measures due to stricter traffic ...
  138. [138]
    Traffic Calming in Three European Cities - SPUR
    Sep 1, 2004 · A look at traffic-calming programs in Zurich, Vienna, and Munich, a redesign of transportation planning to improve overall livability.
  139. [139]
    [PDF] Installation of Speed Humps - SafetyCube DSS
    Speed humps reduce accident rates and vehicle speeds, improving safety for vehicles, pedestrians, and cyclists, and reducing the likelihood of serious injuries.
  140. [140]
    (PDF) A review of effectiveness of speed reducing devices with ...
    Jun 24, 2025 · Though traditionally speed humps are known to reduce speed and increase safety, they too have disadvantages like, increase in travel time, ...
  141. [141]
    Application of Traffic Calming Devices in Developing Countries
    The objective of this study is to evaluate the justification of speed humps in urban roads and also to recommend a guideline for installation of speed humps as ...
  142. [142]
    Speed humps installed by the community: a dirt speed hump in Africa...
    For pedestrians, roads are not safe or improving: Globally pedestrian deaths have increased at nearly twice the rate of other road crash deaths (12.9% increase ...
  143. [143]
    Brazil Speed Bumps & Humps MarketAI Impact : Size, Drivers And ...
    Aug 10, 2025 · Urbanization & traffic density: Rapid urban growth in Brazilian cities leads to congestion and safety concerns, driving municipal adoption of ...
  144. [144]
    Effects of Traffic Calming Measures on Mobility, Road Safety and ...
    Jun 15, 2020 · 3). Traffic calming devices such as speed bumps, speed humps and speed tables are common in Low-Middle Income Countries (LMICs) as well as many ...
  145. [145]
    Identifying Speed Hump, a Traffic Calming Device, as a Hotspot for ...
    Speed humps have higher heavy metal concentrations (Cu, Zn, Pb) than intersections, with pollution load index >3 within 7.5-8.8m, making them hotspots.<|control11|><|separator|>