PROCEEDINGS of the
23rd International Congress on Acoustics
9 to 13 September 2019 in Aachen, Germany

A study on the influence of noise and vibration on the living
environment along the Hokuriku Shinkansen railway
Takashi MORIHARA1; Shigenori YOKOSHIMA2; Yasunao MATSUMOTO31

National Institute of Technology (KOSEN), Ishikawa College, Japan
2

Kanagawa Environmental Research Center, Japan
3

Saitama University, Japan

ABSTRACTOne year after opening of the Hokuriku Shinkansen (high-speed) railway, we conducted a social survey
targeting detached houses along that rail in 2016. Noise and vibration exposure level were estimated at
outdoor points closest to the noise source side of the house. Of the 1,980 people contacted, there were 1,022
valid respondents. The purpose of this research is to investigate the relationship between noise and vibration
exposure and social responses. Regarding the noise annoyance and some living activity disturbances, it was
shown that the responses of residents living in areas without the conventional railway are higher than thosein areas running parallel to conventional railway. This tendency was remarkable especially in areas with highvibration exposure caused by Shinkansen railway. High vibration annoyance was shown in areas without theconventional railway, while there was no difference by the degree of the noise exposure.
Keywords: Social survey, Shinkansen, High-speed railway, Annoyance, Exposure-response relationship

1. INTRODUCTION
The Hokuriku Shinkansen (high-speed) railway connects Nagano Station to Kanazawa Station in
Ishikawa Prefecture, and has been operating since March 2015 (Fig. 1). This route is one of the new
Shinkansen lines, and routes of Hokkaido, Tohoku, and Kyushu routes are expected to be graduallyoperational (1). In this way, the Shinkansen railway has begun to operate across Japan, and the impact
of its noise and vibration on the living environment of residents along the rail is an important issue.
The environmental quality standard for Shinkansen super express railway noise was notified in
1975, and a standard value (peak noise level) was established for each area category type. As morethan 40 years have passed since the environmental standards were notified, and equivalent noise levels
have been applied as the standard value of environmental standards for general noise, it is necessary
to reconsider the appropriate evaluation value for Shinkansen railway noise in Japan.
The authors conducted a social survey of detached houses located along Toyama and Ishikawa
Prefectures in November 2016, one year after the Hokuriku Shinkansen railway became operational
in March 2015 [1]. In May of the following year, a survey was conducted to estimate the noise andvibration exposures in the areas along the Shinkansen railway. The Shinkansen railway operates 92
trips a day, and it does not operate from 24:00 to 6:00 due to restrictions.
The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationships between noise and vibration exposureand community responses.

1

morihara@ishikawa-nct.ac.jp
yokoshima.7c7q@pref.kanagawa.jp
3ymatsu@mail.saitama-u.ac.jp
23007

Figure 1 – A Hokuriku Shinkansen railway

2. ANALIZING THE DATA
2.1 Social Survey
The data analyzed in this study were obtained from a social survey conducted in November 2016
in Ishikawa and Toyama Prefectures of detached houses along the Hokuriku Shinkansen railway (2).
In survey areas in Ishikawa Prefecture, conventional railways run parallel to the Shinkansen railway
except for some areas, while in most of the survey areas in Toyama Prefecture, the two railways do
not run parallel (Fig. 2).
The target houses were all detached houses within 150 m of the Hokuriku Shinkansen railway. If
there were no houses within 150 m, we targeted the first row of houses up to 210 m away from therailway line. In this survey, we decided to randomly select one respondent from each household by
asking for the person whose birthday was closest to the designated date set. In addition, the subjectof the questionnaire survey was living environment, and it was not presented as a survey on noise andvibration in particular. The survey included 43 question items on housing, regional environment,
transportation, lifestyle, and personal factors. The questions on noise and vibration were preparedboth as per 5-point verbal scale and 0 to 10-point numeric scale, following the guidelines andrecommendations of the ICBEN Team 6 (3).
A total of 1,022 people responded to the questionnaire, and response rate was 51.6%. The
respondents were predominantly male (56%), the same value as in the previous survey (4), and 90%of the respondents were over 40 years old (Table 1). This result reflects the dominant demographic ofpeople living in detached houses in regional towns and cities in Japan. We used the WNS-6B scale (5)in the survey to judge sensitivity to noise. A cut-off point of 4/5 on the WNS-6B scale was used.

Conventional railway

Hokuriku Shinkansen line

Tokyo

Survey area in 2016
Kanazawa
StationIshikawa
Prefecture

ToyamaPrefecture© OpenStreetMap contributors

Figure 2 – Rout of Hokuriku Shinkansen and Area of Social Survey

3008

Table 1 – Demographic attribute
Gender (n (%))

FamilySensitivity

Age

Male

Female

Total

size

(n (%))

WNS-6B(n (%))10s

4 (0.4)6 (0.6)10 (1.0)one

116 (11.5)

042 (4.2)

20s

14 (1.4)

12 (1.2)

26 (2.6)

two

341 (33.8)

144(4.4)30s

21 (2.1)

19 (1.9)40 (3.9)three

240 (23.8)

2

116(11.6)

40s

60 (5.9)64 (6.3)

124 (12.2)

four

180 (17.8)

3150(15.1)50s

100 (9.9)

91 (9.0)191 (18.8)

five

75 (7.4)

4209(21.0)60s

185 (18.2)

157 (15.5)

342 (33.7)

six

36 (3.6)

5242(24.3)70s or more

187 (18.4)

94 (9.3)

281 (27.7)

seven

16 (1.6)

6

193(19.4)

eight

5 (0.5)nine

1 (0.1)Total

1,010 (100)Total

996 (100)Total

571 (56.3)

443 (43.7)

1014 (100)

60

60

55

55

50

50
Lvz [dB]

Lvz [dB]

2.2 Estimation of Noise and Vibration Exposure
The Hokuriku Shinkansen railway has the maximum speed of 260 km/h, and the survey area has
an elevated railway structure.
Noise and vibration measurements were conducted to estimate the noise and vibration exposures
for the target houses. The noise exposure levels for the target houses were estimated by the prediction
method of Nagakura et al. (6), and the predicted values were adjusted according to the values measured
at 25 m. Vibration Levels, defined in a Japanese industrial standard with a reference acceleration of
10-5 m/s2 , were estimated by the distance attenuation prediction equations obtained from the measured
value. The surveys were conducted in May 2017 at representative locations of each area, which werethen classified into the eleven areas along the route in Ishikawa and Toyama Prefectures inconsideration of the height of the structure and train speed. In each area, measurement points were
provided in the range of 12.5 m to 100 m with reference to the close orbit center, and sound level
meters (RION NL-31, 32, 42 and 62) and vibration level meters (RION VM-53 and NM-55) were used
at each measurement point. Both exposure levels are outdoor levels of the target housing closest to
the rail track.
Figure 3 shows the relation between noise and Vibration Levels. The X-axis is the mean of the
maximum noise level measured in Slow dynamic characteristic (left), the day-evening-nightequivalent sound level, and the Y-axis is the ground Vibration Level of the vertical direction. The
range of Vibration Level was 30 to 60 dB, and the range of noise level was 60 to 75 dB LA,Smax and
44 to 55dB Lden in the survey area. There were 114 houses with Vibration Levels above 50 dB and 209
houses with noise levels above 70 dB. Table 2 shows the number of the samples sorted in the estimatednoise levels and the existence of conventional railway in the residential area. The Hokuriku
Shinkansen railway is presently operating from Tokyo to Kanazawa Station. Therefore, the area to thewest of Kanazawa Station runs only conventional railways, and the number of respondents in the area
is 95.

45

45

40

40

35

35

30

30
60

65

70
LA,Smax [dB]

75

43

46

49

52

55

58

Lden [dB]3009

Table 2 – Sample sizes divided by noise level
LA,Smax

CR

Lden

CR

LnightCR[dB]

with without

Total

[dB]

with without

Total

[dB]

with without

Total

west

95

-

95

west

95

-

95

west

95

-

95

60-63

8

31

39

44-48

47

127

174

33-36

116

17

133

63-67

137

127

264

48-51

191

177

368

36-38

341

66

407

67-71

351

161

512

51-54

289

21

310

38-41

138

249

387

71-74

99

13

112

50 <

68

7

75

Total

690

332

1,022

Total

690

332

1,022

Total

690

332

1,022

CR: conventional railway, west: west area of Kanazawa Station
Figure 3 – Relationship between noise levels and Vibration Levels

3. ANALYSIS
3.1 Relationships between community response and exposure
Figures 4 and 5 show the relationships between community responses and noise or vibration
exposure levels. This paper defined the ratio of respondents who chose either of the top two categories
in the 5-point verbal scale: % highly annoyed (7) and % highly disturbed.
Noise annoyance in the vicinity of a conventional railway (Conv) area evoked almost a constantresponse to the increase of LA,Smax and Lden , and the noise annoyance was high in the area where theVibration Level was high. Further, the response of the area where the conventional railway does not
run parallel (NC) to the Shinkansen railway in the range of 63-71 dB is much higher than that of Conv
area. Thus, the result that the noise annoyance was greater in the area where the ground Vibration
Level was high is similar to the results for Gidlöf-Gunnarsson et al. (8) and Yokoshima et al. (9). The
result also shows that vibration annoyance was greater in the high noise level residential areas. In
particular, the response in the range of 67-71 dB LA,Smax was high, and the vibration annoyance alsotended to increase as the Vibration Level increased. Table 3 shows the multiple regression analysis ofnoise annoyance. This analysis was used by IBM SPSS Statistics 25. These models were included age,gender, family size and noise sensitivity (WNS-6B) as adjusted valuables. Both LA,Smax and Lden waresignificant. Odds ratio of noise annoyance in the area with a conventional railway was significantly
higher than that of without conventional railway. The vibration factor divided at 50 dB of Vibration
Level was not significant.
Figure 5 shows the results of activity disturbances. Conversation and reading disturbances were
low within this noise level range. For the TV/radio listening disturbance, the response in NC area andhigh Vibration Level areas was slightly high, and 38% were highly disturbed in the range of 48-51 dB
Lden . The thinking disturbance was low in Conv area, and did not depend on Lden , but the response in
Figure 4 – Exposure-response relationships due to noise or vibration annoyance(Conv: with a conventional railway, NC: without conventional railways)

80
60
40
20

80
60

100

West areaVib.≤50dB(Conv)
Vib.>50dB(Conv)
Vib.≤50dB(NC)Vib.>50dB(NC)% highly annoyed by vibration

100

West areaVib.≤50dB(Conv)
Vib.>50dB(Conv)
Vib.≤50dB(NC)Vib.>50dB(NC)% highly annoyed by noise% highly annoyed by noise

100

40
20
0

0
None

60-63

63-67
67-71
LA,Smax (dB)

71-74

80
60
40

West area
44-48(Conv)
48-51(Conv)
51-54(Conv)>54(Conv)
44-48(N.C.)
48-51(N.C.)

20
0

None

44-48

48-51
Lden (dB)

51-54

>54

None

Vib. ≤50dB
Lvz (dB)

Vib. >50dB

NC area was slightly higher. The complaints that the windows cannot be opened because of noise andthe rattling in NC area were higher than that in Conv area. In particular, the response rates of rattling

3010

Table 3 – Results of multiple regression analysis for noise annoyance
95% CI

95% CI

OR

lower

upper

p value

1.112

1.305

<0.0001

Noise exposure

LA,Smax

1.205

Conventional

without

1

railway

with

Lvz

≤50dB

1

>50dB

0.986

0.504

1.929

0.986

CR* Lvz

0.970

0.898

7.747

2.637

Constant

5.6E-07

6.970

Lden
without

4.689

10.361<0.0001

with

OR

lower

upper

p value

1.542

1.059

1.259

0.001

4.840

11.804<0.0001

1
7.558

≤50dB

1

>50dB

1.298

0.676

2.489

0.433

2.573

0.878

7.544

0.085

1.1E-04

OR: Odds ratio, 95% CI: 95 % Confidence interval, CR: Conventional railway
Adjusted variables: Age, Gender, Family size, Noise sensitivity (5), Lvz (1: >50dB)
in the range of 48-51 dB Lden in NC area and large vibrations in residential areas were considerably
high. Falling asleep disturbance in NC area was rather high in the range of 36-41 dB Lnight; and in
addition, the response to Vibration Level of over 50 dB more was even higher. As for being awakened
in the same noise level section, the response tended to be smaller than the falling asleep disturbance.
The fact that the service does not operate between 24:00 and 6:00 may influence being awakened alittle. Further research is necessary because the sound generated by the rattling due to vibration may
affect the listening disturbance.
3.2 Evaluation of Quietness, Satisfaction, and Preference for a residential area
This section presents the results of multiple logistic regression analysis for Quietness around thehouse, Satisfaction with the house and Preference for a residential area. These factors were evaluatedon a 5-point verbal scale and were divided into two categories (1: 4 and 5, 0: 1-3) for the analysis.
Table 4 shows the results of the analysis. Age, gender, family size, noise sensitivity, Lden and ground
Vibration Level were included as explanatory variables. Noise and Vibration Levels were changed to
the nominal scale. All these models were confirmed to be statistically significant by the HosmerLemeshow test.
This analysis was based on the evaluation of under 50 dB Lden in the area with a conventional
railway area (existence area). The evaluation of quietness in areas without conventional railway area(none area) was significant at >50 dB Lden (OR = 2.524, 95% CI: 1.334, 4.777). The factor of Lvz (1:>50dB) included in this model were also significant, and sound generated by vibration such as rattling
may have affected quietness. The satisfaction of respondents living in none area were significant for
both ≤50dB Lden (OR = 2.610, 95% CI: 1.195, 5.701) and >50 dB Lden (OR = 3.198, 95% CI: 1.318,
7.759). On the other hand, the evaluation of preference for a residential area did not show a significant
different between a conventional railway area and a none area.

4. CONCLUSIONSIn this study, using the social survey data obtained one year after the Hokuriku Shinkansen railway
started operating, we presented the exposure-response relationships including a viewpoint regarding
the existence of conventional railway in residential area and the ground vibration level.
With regard to noise annoyance, it was shown that a high percentage of highly annoyed respondents
live in high Vibration Level areas and areas that do not have conventional railways. Although not tothe same degree as noise annoyance, similar trends were observed in activity disturbances. Regarding
the quietness and satisfaction, it was also shown that the existence of conventional railway inresidential areas impacts those evaluations. In other words, when the Shinkansen railway is opened in
an area where there is no conventional railway, not only the noise annoyance, but also the evaluationof the quietness and satisfaction may be deteriorated in Japan.
In future research, it is necessary to investigate hierarchical causal models of noise annoyance and3011

housing satisfaction, and to understand the extent to which noise and vibration affect community
responses.
(b)TV/radio listening(a)Conversation
100

60

80

% highly disturbed

80% higly disturbed

100West areaVib.≤50dB(Conv)
Vib.>50dB(Conv)
Vib.≤50dB(NC)Vib.>50dB(NC)

40

0

0

None

60

44-48

48-51
Lden (dB)

51-54

None

>54

100

West areaVib.≤50dB(Conv)
Vib.>50dB(Conv)
Vib.≤50dB(NC)Vib.>50dB(NC)

80

40
20

44-48

20
0
44-48

48-51
Lden (dB)

51-54

60
40

48-51
Lden (dB)

51-54

>54

(f)RattlingWest area
44-48(Conv)
48-51(Conv)
51-54(Conv)>54(Conv)
44-48(NC)48-51(NC)

20

None

>54

(g)Falling asleep
100

West areaVib.≤50dB(Conv)
Vib.>50dB(Conv)
Vib.≤50dB(NC)Vib.>50dB(NC)80% highly disturbed% highly disturbed

60

80

44-48

0

None

80

West areaVib.≤50dB(Conv)
Vib.>50dB(Conv)
Vib.≤50dB(NC)Vib.>50dB(NC)

None

100

West areaVib.≤50dB(Conv)
Vib.>50dB(Conv)
Vib.≤50dB(NC)Vib.>50dB(NC)

40

100

>54

(d)Thinking

40

48-51
51-54
>54
Lden (dB)(e)Window opening% highly annoyed by vibration% highly disturbed

60

51-54

0
None

80

60

48-51
Lden (dB)

20

0

100

44-48

(c)Reading% highly disturbed% highly disturbed

80

40
20

20

100

60

West areaVib.≤50dB(Conv)
Vib.>50dB(Conv)
Vib.≤50dB(NC)Vib.>50dB(NC)40

60

Vib.≤50dB
Lvz (dB)

Vib.>50dB(h)Awakening

West areaVib.≤50dB(Conv)
Vib.>50dB(Conv)
Vib.≤50dB(NC)Vib.>50dB(NC)

40
20

20
0

0

None

33-36
36-38
Lnight (dB)

38-41

None

33-36
36-38
Lnight (dB)38-41

Figure 5 – Exposure-response relationships due to activity disturbances(Conv: with a conventional railway, NC: without conventional railways)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The present study was supported by Grant-in-Aid for Scientists Research (C) of Japan Society for
the Promotion of Science (No. 15K06341 and 18K04472).

REFERENCES
1. Status of new Shinkansen lines, HP of Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism,
http://www.mlit.go.jp/english/2006/h_railway_bureau/01_shinkansen/03_status.html (Accessed by May
30, 2019).

3012

2. Morihara T, Yokoshima S and Matsumoto Y. Living environment survey along Hokuriku Shinkansen
railway: Social survey conducted on year after opening, 12th ICBEN Congress on Noise as a Public Health
Problem. 2017; ID 3876.
3. ISO/TS 15666. (2003). Acoustics-Assessment of noise annoyance by means of social and socio-acoustic
surveys.
4. Morihara T, Sato T, Yano T. Annoyance caused by combined noise from road traffic and railway in
Ishikawa, Japan, Proceedings of EURONOISE 2009.
5. Kishikawa H, Matsui T, Uchiyama I, Miyakawa M, Hiramatsu K and Stansfeld S.A. The development of
Weinstein’s noise sensitivity scale. Noise & Health, 8:33. 2006, p. 154-160.
6. Nagakura K and Zenda Y. The Method of Predicting the Way-side Noise Level of Shinkansen. TechnicalCommittee Meeting on Noise and Vibration. 2000; N-2000-01.
7. J.M. Fields, et al. Standardized general-purpose noise reaction questions for community noise surveys:
research and a recommendation, Journal of Sound and Vibration. 2001, 242(4), p. 641-679.
8. Gidlöf-Gunnarsson A, Ögren M, Jerson T and Öhrström E. Railway noise annoyance and the importanceof number of trains, ground vibration, and building situational factors, Noise & Health, 14:59. 2012, p.
190-201.
9. Yokoshima S, Matsumoto Y, Shiraishi H, Ota A, and Tamura A. Effects of house vibrations on community
response to ground transportation noise, Proc inter-noise 2013; 15-18 September 2013; Innsbruck, Austria
Table 4 – Odds ratio and 95 % Confidence interval for the evaluation of house and residential area(a) Quietness(b) Satisfaction

95% CI

95% CI

OR

lower

upper

p value

OR

lower

upper

1

-

-

p value

1

-

-

1.260

0.747

2.123

n.s.

1.707 0.797

3.656

n.s.

Lden ≤50dB

1.221

0.695

2.143

n.s.

2.610 1.195

5.701

0.016

>50dB

2.524

1.334

4.777

0.004

3.198 1.318

7.759

0.010

Conventional railway: exist

Lden ≤50dB>50dB
Conventional railway: none(c) Preference for a residential area

Conventional railway: exist

Lden ≤50dB

1

-

-

1.377

0.369

5.135

n.s.

Lden ≤50dB

3.362

0.927

12.190

n.s.

>50dB

2.485

0.533

11.578n.s.

>50dB
Conventional railway: none

Quietness and Satisfaction; 1: bad or extremely bad, Preference for a residential area; 1: dislike or dislike
very much
OR: Odds ratio, 95% CI: 95 % Confidence interval, n.s.: not significant
Adjusted variables: Age, Gender, Family size, Noise sensitivity (5), Lvz (1: >50dB)
2013.

3013