Railway Noise Annoyance Research Articles

Improving knowledge of the acoustic factors involved in railway noise annoyance: first results of a pilot field survey of sixty-two local residents

Railway transportation contributes to the objectives of decarbonization but also generates negative externalities, including noise. Energy noise indicators used to characterize population exposure do not adequately reflect the repetitive nature of railway noise peaks. The GENIFER pilot study aims to test a protocol designed to characterize railway noise events according to the instantaneous perceived annoyance when the train is passing, in order to improve understanding of the influence of acoustic factors on annoyance. The first phase of the survey was carried out in 2023 among 62 residents of a pilot site. An electronic device was used to collect around 5,000 ratings, ranging from 1 to 10, assessing the instantaneous annoyance induced by train noise at passing trains. The site instrumentation included sixteen sound level meters and two video recording systems, enabling annoyance ratings to be associated with the acoustic characteristics of railway noise events. A questionnaire aimed at identifying co-determinants of long-term annoyance was also administered to participants. Feedback on the field implementation of this survey and initial results concerning acoustic measurements, instantaneous annoyance ratings and questionnaire responses will be presented.

Results of a pilot study using experience sampling method to assess railway noise annoyance

This article aims to report on the development of a method to study the acoustic factors driving the short-term annoyance experienced by neighbors of high-speed train lines (> 250 km/h). In fact, current indicators (e.g., LDEN) only partially explain annoyance caused by high-speed trains noise. They could potentially be improved by considering some event-related aspects (e.g., the suddenness, spectral content, temporal fluctuations), whose role remains not fully understood. The development of a protocol dedicated to these issues is an essential prerequisite. A review of the different methods used to study transportation noise annoyance highlights the benefits of the experience sampling method (ESM), not yet used for railway noise assessment. This method allows participants to report their annoyance right after a train pass-by with a remote device while noise exposure is simultaneously recorded. We report on the results of a pilot study aiming to test an experimental protocol by proposing an adaptation of the experience sampling method to study annoyance caused by the passage of high-speed trains. Residents were recruited to take part in the study and received two protocols in two different periods. The most efficient ESM parameters were determined, and further possibilities offered by this new methodology are discussed.

Residential green is associated with reduced annoyance to road traffic and railway noise but increased annoyance to aircraft noise exposure

BackgroundIn recent years, residential green and availability of neighbourhood green spaces came into focus as a potential means to reduce transportation noise annoyance. Literature suggests that various characteristics of residential green may play a role, namely, greenness of the residential areas as quantified by the normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI), visible vegetation from home, and the presence of public green spaces as identified by land use classification data (LU-green), as well as their accessibility and noise pollution (i.e., transportation noise exposure within green areas, how loud/quiet they are). So far, studies mostly focused on road traffic noise in urban areas. ObjectiveWe investigated the effects of residential green on noise annoyance, accounting for different transportation noise sources as well as for the degree of urbanisation. MethodsWe complemented the data set of the recent Swiss SiRENE survey on road traffic, railway and aircraft noise annoyance with a wide range of “green” metrics, and investigated their association with annoyance by means of logistic regression analysis (generalized estimating equations). ResultsIncreasing residential green was found to be associated with reduced road traffic and railway noise annoyance, but increased aircraft noise annoyance. The overall effect corresponded to equivalent level reductions of about 6 dB for road traffic and 3 dB for railway noise, but to an increase of about 10 dB for aircraft noise, when residential green increased from “not much green” (5th percentile of the study sample distribution) to “a lot of green” (95th percentile). Overall, NDVI and LU-green were particularly strongly linked to annoyance. The effects of visible vegetation from home and accessibility and/or quietness of green spaces were, overall, less strong, but depended on the degree of urbanisation. For road traffic noise, visible vegetation and accessibility of green spaces seem to particularly strongly reduce annoyance in cities, while quiet green spaces are more effective in rural areas. ConclusionsOur study emphasizes that residential green should be fostered by city planners, particularly in densely populated areas.

Midregional pro atrial natriuretic peptide: a novel important biomarker for noise annoyance-induced cardiovascular morbidity and mortality?

BackgroundEnvironmental noise exposure has been associated with increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Recently, noise annoyance was shown to induce atrial fibrillation, which was accompanied by significantly increased levels of midregional pro atrial natriuretic peptide (MR-proANP). Therefore, the aim of the present study was to analyze the association between noise annoyance, MR-proANP, incident cardiovascular events, and all-cause mortality.MethodsLevels of MR-proANP were measured in the first 5000 participants of the population-based Gutenberg Health Study. Annoyance was assessed separately for aircraft, road traffic, railway, neighborhood, and industrial/construction noise during the day and sleep.ResultsIn cross-sectional analyses, aircraft noise annoyance during day and sleep, industrial/construction noise annoyance during day, and railway noise annoyance during sleep were independently associated with increased levels of MR-proANP after multivariable adjustment. After a 5-year follow-up period, there were 43 cases of incident atrial fibrillation and 103 of incident cardiovascular disease (comprising atrial fibrillation, coronary artery disease, myocardial infarction, heart failure, or stroke). Moreover, there were 301 deaths after a mean follow-up of 7.42 ± 1.66 years. An odds ratio (OR) of 2.82 ([95% confidence interval (CI) 1.86; 4.35], p < 0.0001) for incident atrial fibrillation and an OR of 1.49 ([95% CI 1.13; 1.96], p = 0.0046) for incident cardiovascular disease per 1-standard deviation (SD) increase in MR-proANP levels were found. A 36% (hazard ratio: 1.36 [95% CI 1.19; 1.55], p < 0.0001) higher risk of death was found per 1-SD increase in MR-proANP levels.ConclusionsNoise annoyance may contribute to cardiovascular morbidity and mortality and is characterized by increased levels of MR-proANP.Graphic abstract

Annoyance due to combined railway noise and vibration: Comparison and testing of results from the literature

In situ surveys report some interactions between railway noise annoyance and the level of railway vibration on one hand, and between railway vibration annoyance and the level of railway noise on the other hand. Few studies have been conducted to investigate these interaction phenomena under laboratory conditions and their results are contradictory. During a laboratory experiment, recordings of noise and vibration from two train passages (1 freight train and 1 passenger train) were presented in combination to participants at different noise and vibration levels. The influence of noise level on participants’ annoyance due to vibration, as well as the influence of vibration level on participants’ noise annoyance was assessed in order to investigate two potential explanations for the contradictory results from the literature. Total annoyance responses due to combined noise and vibration were also analysed to further evaluate the influence of global noise and vibration levels on annoyance. No influence of vibration level on noise annoyance was detected. A weak influence of noise level on vibration annoyance was found, only when the vibration level was high (LVeq=116 dB). Several existing total annoyance models were tested. Among those, perceptual models showed good agreement with the laboratory data.

Railway noise annoyance modeling: Accounting for noise sensitivity and different acoustical features.

Noise annoyance due to railway traffic is a growing issue in today's society. This annoyance may be predicted using noise-exposure relationships with mean energy-based index. However, there is room for improvement of models as other acoustical and non-acoustical factors also influence noise annoyance responses. In this paper, it is proposed to highlight annoying auditory sensations evoked by the railway noise and determine acoustical and psychoacoustical indices combined in a predictive model. A laboratory experiment involving railway pass-by noise in urban areas was carried out. Annoyance ratings, noise sensitivity ratings, and free verbalization data were gathered. The analysis underlined annoying auditory sensations caused by railway pass-by noises. Two indices were proposed to account for irregular amplitude fluctuation and noise event duration-related sensations. A multilevel regression analysis was conducted, leading to two annoyance models considering noise indices and noise sensitivity. These models were finally compared to a similarly obtained multilevel regression model related to tramway noise annoyance. The comparison was carried out as a cross-validation considering the models and the respective datasets collected in laboratory conditions for model construction. Results showed that the railway noise annoyance model led to a good prediction of tramway noise annoyance and vice versa.

Effects of Railway Elevation, Operation of a New Station, and Earthquakes on Railway Noise Annoyance in Kumamoto, Japan

This study investigated the effects of railway elevation, operation of a new station, and earthquakes on railway noise annoyance in two areas along a conventional railway line (CRL) adjacent to the Kyushu Shinkansen line: the north area with the CRL elevation and the south area with the operation of the new station, both of which occurred in March 2016. In April 2016, Kumamoto region was struck by a series of large earthquakes, prompting their inclusion in this study, as frequent aftershocks with loud ground rumbling might make people more sensitive to railway noise and vibration. Socioacoustic surveys were performed in both areas before and after the earthquakes. Because very few respondents in the north area reported that they were “highly annoyed,” further analysis was conducted on data from the south area. The exposure–annoyance relationship was found to be significantly higher in 2017 than in 2011 despite lower noise exposure. Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that Lden, noise sensitivity, and serious damage by the earthquakes in addition to the operation of the new station significantly affected the annoyance in both detached and apartment houses. However, when the earthquakes caused minimal damage, they did not significantly affect annoyance.

Railway noise annoyance on the railway track in northwest slovakia.

Introduction:This paper describes an assessment of noise caused by railway traffic in a large high-loaded railway track in Northwest Slovakia.Materials and Methods:The measurements of noise levels generated by trains passing through residential neighborhoods were taken. Noise maps were also calculated showing noise pollution generated by the train traffic. In addition, the annoyance level and sleep disturbance of residents affected by railway noise were evaluated by a validated questionnaire on a pilot sample of 107 respondents living near the important railway track.Results:The measurements indicated that the noise levels generated by the passage of the train were extremely high especially at night, clearly exceeding the nighttime limits of equivalent sound pressure level established by the Decree of the Slovak Ministry of Health (No.549/2007) (L Aeq = 55 dB). Measurements at one point during the night exceeded the limit values of up to 17.4 dB. The residents reported feeling affected by the noise generated by passing trains, which caused irritability, headache, poor concentration, and insomnia. In addition, 19.64% of the residents claimed that nocturnal noise pollution was the most distressing. The results of bivariate analysis showed a higher risk of annoyance especially for railway noise [ORMH = 7.80 (4.02–15.14)] and the noise from industry [ORMH = 3.08 (1.72–5.50)] in the exposed location.Discussion:The effects of railway traffic on annoyance/sleep and psychosocial well-being were evaluated in a few studies. In accordance with our results the railway noise mostly disturbs sleep and rest of the respondents.Conclusion:The pilot survey showed the importance of sleep and rest disturbance by railway noise and the possibilities of getting worse health condition in the future. Noise abatement measures and strategies should, therefore, be implemented in an effective and manageable way increasing the environmental advantages of rail transport.

Railway noise annoyance: exposure-response relationships and testing a theoretical model by structural equation analysis.

In some regions the exposure to railway noise is extremely concentrated, which may lead to high residential annoyance. Nonacoustical factors contribute to these reactions, but there is limited evidence on the interrelations between the nonacoustical factors that influence railway noise annoyance. The aims of the present study were (1) to examine exposure-response relationships between long-term railway noise exposure and annoyance in a region severely affected by railway noise and (2) to determine a priori proposed interrelations between nonacoustical factors by structural equation analysis. Residents (n = 320) living close to railway tracks in the Middle Rhine Valley completed a socio-acoustic survey. Individual noise exposure levels were calculated by an acoustical simulation model for this area. The derived exposure-response relationships indicated considerably higher annoyance at the same noise exposure level than would have been predicted by the European Union standard curve, particularly for the night-time period. In the structural equation analysis, 72% of the variance in noise annoyance was explained by the noise exposure (L(den)) and nonacoustical variables. The model provides insights into several causal mechanisms underlying the formation of railway noise annoyance considering indirect and reciprocal effects. The concern about harmful effects of railway noise and railway traffic, the perceived control and coping capacity, and the individual noise sensitivity were the most important factors that influence noise annoyance. All effects of the nonacoustical factors on annoyance were mediated by the perceived control and coping capacity and additionally proposed indirect effects of the theoretical model were supported by the data.

Railway noise annoyance and the importance of number of trains, ground vibration, and building situational factors

Internationally accepted exposure-response relationships show that railway noise causes less annoyance than road traffic and aircraft noise. Railway transport, both passenger and freight transport, is increasing, and new railway lines are planned for environmental reasons. The combination of more frequent railway traffic and faster and heavier trains will, most probably, lead to more disturbances from railway traffic in the near future. To effectively plan for mitigations against noise and vibration from railway traffic, new studies are needed to obtain a better basis of knowledge. The main objectives of the present study was to investigate how the relationship between noise levels from railway traffic and general annoyance is influenced by (i) number of trains, (ii) the presence of ground borne vibrations, and (iii) building situational factors, such as orientation of balcony/patio and bedroom window. Socio-acoustic field studies were executed in residential areas; (1) with relatively intense railway traffic; (2) with strong vibrations, and; (3) with the most intense railway traffic in the country. Data was obtained for 1695 respondents exposed to sound levels ranging from L(Aeq,24h) 45 to 65 dB. Both number of trains and presence of ground-borne vibrations, and not just the noise level per se, are of relevance for how annoying railway noise is perceived. The results imply that, for the proportion annoyed to be equal, a 5 - 7 dB lower noise level is needed in areas where the railway traffic causes strong ground-borne vibrations and in areas with a very large number of trains. General noise annoyance was twice as high among residents in dwellings with balcony / patio oriented towards the railway and about 1.5 times higher among residents with bedroom windows facing the railway.

Relationship between road and railway noise annoyance and overall indoor sound exposure

Using data from a realistic experiment conducted using recorded traffic sounds, the relationship between indicators of magnitude, spectrum, and temporal evolution of the sonic environment and the reported annoyance are analyzed. The exposure is characterized by the binaurally recorded overall indoor sound. It is found that a series of parameters derived from multiple linear models related to the temporal and spectral structure of the sound pressure level produces better models than the overall indoor A-weighted equivalent noise level. The descriptors thus complement this indicator, at least when exposure is based on overall indoor sound. Principle components amongst the exposure indicators studied relate to the detectability of the sound indoors and to the typical temporal difference between road and rail traffic. Linear models based on these indicators also outperform models based on source related façade.

Acceptable Noise Levels for New Railways

There is, at present, no UK legislation controlling the noise that may be emitted by railways. The widespread concern over noise likely to be radiated from the Channel Tunnel Rail Link has highlighted this deficiency and in March 1990 the Government established the Mitchell Committee to recommend guidelines for a national noise insulation standard for new railways. The results of previous studies of railway noise annoyance and the acceptability criteria that have been derived are examined with reference to recent research, and more effective criteria for social acceptability are suggested where new rail lines are concerned.

Comparing the relationships between noise level and annoyance in different surveys: A railway noise vs. aircraft and road traffic comparison

Annoyance expressed in a railway noise survey is compared with that in two road traffic and three aircraft surveys in order to determine whether responses to various environmental noises are similar or are source-specific. Railway noise is less annoying than other noises at any given high noise level. Railway noise annoyance increases less rapidly with increasing noise level. At high noise levels this gap in reactions averages about 10 dB but ranges from 4 dB to more than 20 dB. Comparisons between the findings in the different surveys can be made only after considering differences in noise index calculation procedures, human response measurement procedures and annoyance moderating conditions. The methodology for comparing surveys is examined. It is found that methodological uncertainties lead to imprecise comparisons and that different annoyance scales give different estimates of intersurvey differences.

Railway noise annoyance in residential areas: Current findings and suggestions for future research

Five published studies of railway noise annoyance in residential areas are reviewed. All the studies find that annoyance increases with railway noise levels and number of train passages. Two studies showed reactions to railway and road traffic noise as not strikingly different but the five studies do not agree on the actual relation between railway noise and annoyance. The apparent differences between the studies' findings may be due to genuine differences in annoyance reactions or to differences in study designs or measurement techniques. Some methods for ensuring more comparable results are suggested in the areas of sample design, questionnaire construction, observational data, and reporting of results.