Journal of Sound and Vibration (1996) 193(1), 319–334

NOISE CONTROL OF HIGH SPEED SHINKANSEN

Y. M, Y. Z  K. N
Noise Reduction Group, Railway Technical Research Institute, 2-8-38, Hikari-chyo,
Kokubunji-shi, Tokyo, Japan

(Received in final form 20 November 1995)

A review of Shinkansen noise and methods for its control is given. In the process of
controlling the noise, it has been found that many types of noise are generated from various
parts of cars and other installations. These include rolling noise, bridge structure noise,
pantograph spark noise, pantograph aerodynamic noise, other aerodynamic noise and gear
noise. The countermeasures to reduce the individual noise are described. In order to control
wayside noise, we must know the contribution of each noise element. For this purpose,
‘‘microphone array’’ and ‘‘parabola microphone’’ measurements are made. The methods
of treatment of the data obtained by this measuring equipment are shown, and the amount
of noise generated from the individual noise source is estimated. When the train speed
increases, the contribution of aerodynamic noise becomes large. It will be considerably
reduced if the surface of cars is smooth. Finally, we deduce the least possible noise values
of Shinkansen, on the basis of the results obtained so far.
7 1996 Academic Press Limited

1. INTRODUCTION
When Shinkansen commenced operation at the speed of about 200 km/h, the noise
problems of main concern were rolling noise and steel bridge noise. Wayside noise values
of about 90 dB(A) were regularly observed alongside ballast tracks and regular
embankments. Today, Shinkansen cars generally run at the speed of 220–270 km/h, and
the noise values (A-weighted maximum sound pressure level, slow) at the wayside are
below 75 dB(A) or a little more. Various countermeasures are practised not only for
rolling noise and steel bridge noise, but also for other noises. In the process of controlling
the noise, new noises have become apparent. They include concrete bridge noise,
pantograph spark noise, aerodynamic noise and gear noise. In order to reduce each of
them, various improvements have been made to Shinkansen cars and other facilities.
Main countermeasures have included grinding the rail surface, abrasive block equipment,
application of bus cables, pantograph covers, smoothing the car’s surface, ballast-mats and
so on.
These countermeasures correspond respectively to the noise described above. Therefore,
we must apply countermeasures according to our understanding of which noises are the
major contributors alongside the Shinkansen tracks. That is to say, it is important to
know the contribution of each noise source to the total noise. Analyses of noise
contributions were started in about 1980. At the time, the major noises were the rolling
noise and the spark noise. After these two noises were attenuated by means of grinding
rails and using bus-cables, aerodynamic noise began to play the leading role (in 1984–5).
The importance of aerodynamic noise was proved clearly by the fact that marked noise
reduction was obtained by new test cars (to increase speeds) from which most of the
319
0022–460X/96/210319 + 16 $18.00/0 7 1996 Academic Press Limited
320 .   .
aerodynamic noise sources were removed (1989–92). However, it is almost impossible to
alter all the cars in operation.
In section 2, a review of Shinkansen noise and its control methods is given. It is a
historical description, but it also applies to the current noise problems. The methods
of analyzing the various noise sources are explained in section 3. We have used the
‘‘microphone array’’ in order to obtain the information about various noise sources.
Now, measurements are also being made with ‘‘a microphone with a paraboloidal
reflecting plate’’. These methods and the results are described in section 3. Studies
concerning aerodynamic noise of Shinkansen cars were initiated in about 1985; the results
are given in section 4. In section 5, the relation between the noise and the speed of
Shinkansen trains is shown.

2. REVIEW OF SHINKANSEN NOISE CONTROLS

2.1.      [1]
The main source of the rolling nosie in Shinkansen is not wheel vibration, but rail
vibration. This conclusion was obtained from the following results, in about 1980.
(1) The frequency spectrum of wheel vibration is significantly different from the sound
spectrum measured under the floor of the running car. The former consists of discrete
peaks, but the latter is continuous (see Figure 1).
(2) The rail vibration velocity has the same spectrum as the sound measured near the
rail when the car runs over it, at frequencies greater than 500 Hz.
(3) The relation between the rail vibration and the rolling noise has been proved by
using a special measurement method [2].
Therefore, it seems probable that the rolling noise would not be attenuated by using a
damped wheel. In fact, the damped wheel developed in JNR reduced the wheel vibration,
but it did not affect the rolling noise. Damped rails and resilient rails were also developed,
but they have not been applied in practice.
Shinkansen cars were equipped with cast iron blocks, which were pressed on the wheel
tread surfaces during braking to remove the contaminant substances on the surfaces.

Figure 1. Spectrum comparison (train speed = 200 km/h): (a) noise under the floor of running car;
(b) wheel–tyre acceleration.
       321
They played a role in improving the adhesion between wheel and rail. In 1972–3, the cast
iron blocks were replaced by abrasive composite blocks in order to improve the adhesion
effects. Incidentally, it was found that the rolling noise from cars equipped with the
abrasive composite blocks was much less than that from the cars with cast iron blocks.
The abrasive composite blocks are now widely used in practice, and as a result, the
corrugations on the treads of the wheels with cast iron blocks disappears, and wheel-flats
are prevented. The rolling noise is reduced by about 7 dB for frequencies above 2 kHz,
and the A-weighted sound pressure level of the rolling noise becomes less than before by
4 dB.
Another method which led to the reduction of the Shinkansen rolling noise is grinding
the rail surface. It has long been known that rolling noise could be reduced by grinding
rails with a corrugated surface. It was also shown in 1983–4 that remarkable reductions
in rolling noise were obtained if rails in normal condition were ground. In Figure 2 it is
shown how the rail vibration and the noise generated are reduced by grinding rail surfaces.
The sound pressure level measured near rails is considered to be representative of the
rolling noise, and it is reduced by grinding by about 6 dB(A). Incidentally, bridge structure
noise is also reduced by the same amount.
We use a simple continuous line source model of finite length to estimate the
contribution of the rolling noise observed at the wayside of the Shinkansen line.
Let the A-weighted maximum sound pressure level of the rolling noise observed at the
position P at a distance of r (m) from rails be LR (P); then we have
LR (P) = PWLR − 8 + 10 log [(2/r) arctan (L/2r)] − DL, (1)
where PWLR is the A-weighted level of the rolling noise power radiated from rails of unit
length (1 m), L is train length (m), and DL is the correction which describes the screening
effects by obstructions such as noise barriers. The rolling noise on slab tracks is larger than
that on ballast tracks by about 5 dB(A). This is mainly due to the difference between the
reflecting characteristics of these track surfaces. Therefore, if the surface of slab tracks can
be made sufficiently absorptive, the rolling noise will be reduced at least by 5 dB(A).

Figure 2. The effect of smoothing the rail surface (train speed = 200 km/h): (a) rail vibration acceleration;
(b) noise observed near the rail; (c) noise observed at the point (P0 ) under the concrete bridge structure; (d) noise
measured with microphone array at P25 (corresponding to rolling noise). W, Before smoothing rail surface;
w, after smoothing rail surface.
322 .   .
The correction DL depends on the structure of the barriers. Today, on Shinkansen lines
straight walls or inverted L type walls are constructed as barriers at a distance of about
3–4 m from the centre of the tracks, the heights of which are 1·5–2·0 m above the surface
of the rails. Sound-absorbing materials are sometimes applied on the inner surface of the
wall. For walls without absorbing materials, multiple reflections occur between the wall
and car bodies, as a result, the screening effect of the wall is reduced. It is a difficult problem
to estimate DL for walls of various conditions, and an approximate procedure will be
shown in section 3.
Until now the noise observed near rails has been considered to consist mainly of rolling
noise. However, it has been found that the noise from gears of the driving motors made
a significant contribution. In many cases, every Shinkansen car has motors for driving.
The motors are connected through gears to the axles, from which noise at the gearing
frequency is generated. This noise is significant when cars run under power (see Figure 3;
frequency = revolutions of axle × number of cogs of gear wheel). The gear noise makes
almost the same contribution as the rolling noise to the A-weighted sound pressure level
measured near the rails, and the contribution of the gear noise observed outside the
barriers is slightly less than that of the rolling noise. The gear noise is proportional to
the torque exerted on the gears; therefore it depends on the resistance force on the whole
train when running at constant speed. Thus, the power of the gear noise radiated from
a gear (WG ) is estimated as

WG A(d/g)(VF 2/N 2 ),

where d is the diameter of the wheels, g is the number of cogs of the gear wheels, F is the
resistance force, and N is the total number of driving axles.
A variety of equipment is fitted under the Shinkansen cars. However, with the exception
of the gearbox the noise from it does not contribute to the overall noise. Aerodynamic
noise generated at the lower parts of cars appears to be much less than the rolling noise
and the gear noise.

Figure 3. An example of gear noise (train speed = 230 km/h). W, Noise observed near the rail corresponding
to motored car; w, rail vibration velocity corresponding to motored car; Q, noise observed near the rail
corresponding to trailer coach; q, rail vibration velocity corresponding to trailer coach.
       323
2.2.   
In the Shinkansen, there are many concrete bridge structures. Steel bridges are used on
very few sections, although the Shinkansen noise problems commenced in those sections.
In those sections where steel bridge noise is of concern, the bridge is now shielded on the
underside and damping to the steel members, resilient methods and rail smoothing, etc.,
are applied. As a result, the noise is almost the same as that of the concrete bridges.
In the following we consider methods of controlling the noise from the vibration of
concrete bridges.
When cars run on rails, the vibrating motion of the rails is communicated to the
supporting structures such as tracks and concrete structures (bridges). The sound
generated by the vibration of the concrete bridges is called the structure noise. The
frequencies of the structure noise are generally lower than those of the rolling noise,
and it is found that there is no difference of A-weighted sound pressure level of the
structure noise between slab and ballast tracks. At least for frequencies below 1000 Hz,
slab tracks and ballast tracks behave as a spring in the same manner. When rail smoothing
methods were not used, the contribution of the structure noise at the point (P25 ) at a
distance of 25 m from the track was 70–75 dB(A) (train speed 200 km/h). It can be reduced
to about 65 dB by rail smoothing methods. On ballast tracks, large attenuation (about
10 dB(A)) of the structure noise was obtained by laying rubber sheets (ballast mats)
of thickness 30 mm between the ballast and the upper surface of the structure (around
1972). As a result, the structure noise of ballast tracks is negligible compared to other
noises. For slab tracks, the same methods were applied, without success. However,
after rail smoothing methods were applied, the structure noise was reduced and could be
neglected. Only recently has it been observed that structure noise with frequencies of about
100 Hz is frequently found. Some examples are shown in Figure 4. The spectra have
marked peaks at frequencies around 100 Hz, which influence the A-weighted sound
pressure level at the point P25 . The vibration of the concrete bridge can be regarded as
lateral vibration of a plate, so that the directivity of acoustic radiation depends on the

Figure 4. An example of concrete bridge structure noise (train speed = 240 km/h). w, Noise observed at the
point (P0 ); W, noise observed at the point (P25 ).
324 .   .

Figure 5. The frequency dependence of acoustic radiation directivity. sin u = zfc /f where f is the noise
frequency (Hz) and fc is the coincidence frequency (Hz).

frequencies (see Figure 5). Therefore, the low frequency sound has a relatively large
influence at distant points. The explanation for the cause of the 100 Hz noise is not yet
clear. It can be inferred that it is due to irregularities on the rail surface which have a
wavelength corresponding to the spacing between the rail clips, but there is no clear
evidence.

2.3.  

Since 1973–4, pantograph noise has attracted considerable attention. The major part
of pantograph noise was ‘‘spark noise’’ generated when the pantograph separated from
the overhead wire. Various devices were tried to prevent the separation, and finally a
‘‘bus’’, connecting plural pantographs electrically was used, and it was found that spark
noise almost vanished [3]. Today, the bus methods are applied as part of the regular
equipment on Shinkansen cars.
Once the spark noise has been removed, pantographs radiate only aerodynamic noise.
Its contribution alongside Shinkansen is significant, especially when cars run at high speed.
The method employed now to reduce this noise is a ‘‘pantograph shield’’. At first, it was
proposed as a method of screening the pantograph noise [4]. Later, its effect on the air
flow was observed. In Shinkansen cars now in operation, the aerodynamic noise of
pantographs is reduced by 4–5 dB(A) by these methods. The pantograph shield itself is
an additional aerodynamic noise source. However, the original pantograph noise is so
large that the total noise is reduced even if an extra noise source is added by providing
the pantograph shield. However, it is desirable to consider the low noise-structure of
the pantograph itself. With this in mind, the new types of pantograph are now being
developed, and promising results have been obtained [5]. If we are to reduce the
Shinkansen noise (maximum A-weighted sound pressure level) at the wayside to below
75 dB(A), which is the value recommended in the Environmental Standard issued by
the Environment Agency (in 1975), the contribution of the pantograph aerodynamic noise
must be reduced to 70 dB(A). By use of a traditional type of pantograph, the upper limit
of the train speed at which we can achieve this noise level is estimated to be around
300 km/h or a little more, when using noise barriers with the height of 2 m. Therefore, the
use of the new type of pantograph seems to be inevitable if the total noise value at speeds
higher than 300 km/h is to be reduced to below 75 dB(A).

2.4.  

Aerodynamic noise sources other than pantographs are also significant in the noise
alongside Shinkansen tracks. Since about 1988, we have identified them and the
       325
characteristics of noise radiation. The main sources of aerodynamic noise from Shinkansen
cars are as follows: (1) the louvres of air inlets and outlets equipped on the surface of
cars; (2) insulators on the car roof, which are necessary for bus cables to extend to different
cars; (3) the surfaces of air conditioners and antennae on the car roof; (4) the surface of
cars near the front nose, where the speed of the air flow is very high; (5) gaps between any
two adjoining cars; (6) the hollows due to windows or doors on the surface of cars.
Aerodynamic noise generated from sources (1), (2), (3) and (4) is conspicuous for cars
now in operation. When cars run at the speed of 220–240 km/h, their total contribution is
nearly equal to that of the rolling noise and gear noise, with trackside barriers about 2 m
high. The aerodynamic noise power increases in proportion to about the sixth power of the
train speed, so that it is necessary to control these noise sources, if the speed is increased
and noise is to be kept low. The methods of controlling aerodynamic noise sources are
rather simple. The aerodynamic noise can be reduced drastically if sources (1)–(6) are
removed and the car surface is made smooth. Details of these subjects are given in section 4.

3. ANALYSIS OF NOISE CONTRIBUTIONS FROM VARIOUS SOURCES

3.1.    
To investigate the distribution of noise sources along the train (one-dimensional
distribution), a directional measuring system is used; that is to say, a microphone array
located at a point at a distance of 25 m away from the track (the point P25 ). The accuracy
of the measurement of the noise source distribution depends both on the directivity of the
microphone array and the distance of the measuring point from the track. The block
diagram and directivity of the microphone array are shown in Figure 6. By use of the

Figure 6. A block diagram and the directivity of the microphone array ( f0 = 1 kHz): (a) block diagram;
(b) directivity. —, Calculated value; W, experimental value.
326 .   .
microphone array, the magnitude of the localized noise sources along the train can be
determined. The required noise index is the maximum A-weighted sound pressure level
with time weighting ‘‘slow’’ (called here the ‘‘noise value’’). The results measured with the
microphone array correspond to each localized noise source within about 6 m along
the train, and the time history shows the distribution of the noise sources. The procedure
for calculating the time history of the noise value on the basis of the data measured with
the microphone array can be explained as follows. (Once the procedure is defined, the
contributions of various localized noise sources to the noise value can be estimated).
First, the peak levels and trough levels (LA (i), i = 1, 2, 3, . . . ) of the time history of the
sound pressure level measured with the microphone array are read one after another in
time order. Next the Shinkansen noise source is replaced by a continuous non-uniform line
source of finite length, divided into sections of 12·5 m length (half-length of a car;
see Figure 7). For each section, a continuous and uniform source distribution is assumed.
The level of acoustic power radiated from a unit length (1 m) of the ith section is
PWLA (i) = LA (i) + 28·2 dB, because of the directivity of the line array. The A-weighted
sound pressure level, L(t), is calculated by integrating the contributions of this
non-uniform line source:

g
L/2
10PWL(x)/10
L(t) = 10 log dx − 8,
−L/2
25 + (x + Vt)2
2

and the A-weighted sound pressure level (slow), noise value LSLOW (t), is then

$g 0 1 %
t−t
t
1
LSLOW (t) = 10 log 10L(t)/10 exp − dt ,
T −a
T

where the x-axis is taken along the train, the origin of which is the centre of the train,
PWL(x) denotes the level of the sound power radiated from unit length at x, the origin
of time t corresponds to the instant at which the centre of the train (x = 0) is opposite
the measuring point, T is the time constant of the level, and L is the train length.

3.2.      

As mentioned in section 2, Shinkansen noise consists of various sources. Here,
Shinkansen noise is divided into four components as follows: (1) rolling noise, gear noise;

Figure 7. The relation between the time history measured with a microphone array and a line source: (a) time
history; (b) line source. N is the number of cars.
       327
(2) concrete bridge structure noise; (3) pantograph aerodynamic noise; (4) aerodynamic
noise. The contribution of each component to the noise value is estimated on the basis
of the measurement results of the microphone array. However, the microphone array
gives no information about the vertical distribution of noise sources. For example,
the distinction between rolling noise and aerodynamic noise cannot be made by the
microphone array alone. In addition to the data measured with the microphone array,
the sound pressure levels near the rail and under the concrete bridge structure are also
measured. The process is as follows.

3.2.1. Rolling noise, gear noise

The A-weighted sound pressure level of the rolling noise and the gear noise can be
calculated by equation (1). The level of acoustic power radiated from unit length, i.e.,
PWLR , is defined by the A-weighted sound pressure level measured at the point at
a distance of 2 m from the rail and at a height of 0·45 m above the rail surface ( = LR ).
PWLR is estimated approximately by LR + 2·5 dB(A) on the basis of the measured value.
The correction DL depends on the structure of the noise barriers. Here, we consider
three types of barriers: (a) straight wall; (b) straight wall with absorbing materials;
(c) inverted L type wall with absorbing materials. By using measured data, the effect of
(a) can be calculated approximately by the ordinary procedure by estimating the path
difference. The effect of (b) is larger than that of (a) by about 2 dB and that of (c) by about
4 dB.

3.2.2. Concrete bridge structure noise

The contribution of the noise of a concrete bridge structure to the noise value at a distant
point (e.g., P12·5 , P25 ) is estimated on the basis of the data measured at the point P0 under
the structure. The attenuation of concrete bridge structure noise with distance is shown
in Figure 8. By using this figure, the contribution of concrete structure noise, Ls (P25 ),
is estimated as

Ls (P25 ) = 10 log s 10{L0 ( fn ) − DL(fn )}/10,

fn

where L0 ( fn ) is the one-third octave band A-weighted sound pressure level ( fn is the
centre frequency) measured at P0 , and DL( fn ) is the difference between the one-third
octave band A-weighted sound pressure level of the concrete structure noise at P0 and that
at P25 .

3.2.3. Pantograph noise

Pantograph noise is shown in the time history measured with the microphone array as
peak levels corresponding to pantograph pass-by times. Therefore we can estimate the
contribution of this noise if we apply the method mentioned in section 3.1 to the peak
levels corresponding to the pantographs.

3.2.4. Aerodynamic noise

The time history measured with the microphone array (except for the peaks
corresponding to the pantographs) represents the total contribution of the rolling noise,
gear noise, and aerodynamic noise. In order to estimate the contribution of aerodynamic
noise, we calculate the noise value from the peak levels and troughs excluding the peaks
corresponding to pantographs, and subtract the contributions of rolling noise and gear
noise.
328 .   .

Figure 8. Attenuaton of the concrete structure noise with distance. w, P0 ; W, P12·5 ; r, P25 .

By use of the above method, the contributions of various noise components to the
A-weighted sound pressure level (slow) at P25 can be estimated. The results are shown in
Table 1.

3.3.    - 

To obtain more refined information about the noise sources, another directional
measuring device consisting of a microphone with a paraboloidal reflector (parabola
apparatus) has been used recently. Although its directivity and sensitivity depend on the
frequency of the incident sound (see Figure 9), it gives a two-dimensional source
distribution and has better definition than the microphone array for the high frequency
sound. Useful information can be obtained about the noise source distribution from
a parabola apparatus if use is made of this advantage. The results will be shown in
section 4.

T 1
Contributions of various noise elements to the A-weighted sound pressure level (slow) at P25
(train speed = 230–240 km/h, elevated concrete bridge structure 7–9 m above the ground,
noise barrier 2 m height above the rail)
Noise elements Conditions Contributions at P25 (dB(A))
Rolling noise and gear noise Slab tracks 70–72
Ballast tracks 65–67
Pantograph noise With pantograph shields 67–69
Without pantograph shields 72
Aerodynamic noise 72–75
       329

Figure 9. The parabola apparatus. (a) Construction. (b) Directivity (experimental values): ×, 1 kHz; W, 2 kHz;
w, 4 kHz. (c) Gain characteristic (incident angle = 0°, experimental values).

4. AERODYNAMIC NOISE OF SHINKANSEN CARS [6]

In Figure 10 are shown examples of the time history of the A-weighted sound pressure
level measured with the microphone array placed at the point P25 (see section 2.2). Different
time-level histories are obtained for different types of Shinkansen cars. From Figure 10,
it is clear that aerodynamic noise is generated from each of local parts of the car surface,
and they can be classified as follows.

Figure 10. The time history of the A-weighted sound level measured with a microphone array at P25 (train
speed = 220–240 km/h).
330 .   .

Figure 11. The spectrum of noise generated from pantograph with a pantograph shield measured with the
microphone array at P25 (train speed = 220 km/h).

4.1.    

Aerodynamic noise from pantographs is especially prominent. It is generated from
unsteady air flows induced by the various bar-shaped components of the pantographs.
The spectrum of the noise is shown in Figure 11. In order to reduce this noise, the
pantograph shield is effective. However, as a result, additional aerodynamic noise is
generated from the pantograph shield itself. Attempts are now being made to find the
most suitable combination of pantograph and pantograph shield, by wind tunnel
experiments and field tests. Recently, satisfactory results have been obtained by using a
low noise pantograph which consists of a single shoe and current collector and a single
supporting arm [5].

4.2. A       

Most Shinkansen cars are equipped with the louvre intake for air conditioning on the
upper side plates. In some cases, considerable aerodynamic noise is generated from a louvre
intake comprising vertical lattices. An example of the phenomenon is shown in Figure 12.

Figure 12. Spectra of noise radiated from the louvre measured with the microphone array at P25 (train
speed = 230 km/h). e, With long louvre (h = 45 cm); r, with short louvre (h = 19 cm); W, without louvre.
       331
In many cases, aerodynamic noise generated from the louvre intake has a tone component,
the frequency of which is determined by the size of the cross-section of the lattice bar and
the train speed. At present, a louvre intake comprising horizontal lattices has been adopted
as one of the measures to counter aerodynamic noise. However, aerodynamic noise from
the improved louvre is still greater than that from the smooth surface of the car.

4.3.        

The difference in noise level between two conditions, with and without the electric
insulator, is shown in Figure 13. The difference is observed to be in the higher frequency
range, and the influence of insulator noise is considered to be most marked at these
frequencies. Strong pure tones can be generated when special shapes and alignments
are used.

4.4.          
The influence of this noise source on the wayside noise level is less than those of sources
mentioned above. Unsteady air flow induced by the many small cavities and louvres of
the air conditioner causes this noise. Continuous spectra are observed.

4.5.          
In Figure 10 is shown significant noise generation at the front nose of the leading car.
This noise is caused from the unsteady air flow induced by the surface shape near the
leading car nose. The spectra of noise radiated from two different front nose shapes
are shown in Figure 14. By smoothing the front nose surface, noise reduction of about
10 dB has been obtained.

4.6.    ,      
A noise level time history obtained from the parabola apparatus (1/3 octave band centre
frequency 8 kHz) is shown in Figure 15. Noises generated from windows, doors and gaps
between adjacent cars are clearly shown. These noises are at quite high frequencies.
Detailed observation shows that these noises are generated from the ridges of the window
and door frames.

Figure 13. Spectra of noise generated from electric insulators measured with microphone array at P25
(train-speed = 235 km/h). w, With special electric insulators; W, without electric insulator.
332 .   .

Figure 14. Spectra of noise radiated from front nose of leading car measured with microphone array at P25
(train speed = 220 km/h). W, S1 train; w, S2 train.

4.7. 
The aerodynamic noises mentioned above are generated from relatively localized areas;
namely, the local surface structures. The sum of the noises determines the total
aerodynamic noise level at the wayside in the presence of a noise barrier with a height of
2 m above the upper surface of the rails. It is clear that the aerodynamic noise of the
Shinkansen car is considerably reduced if these noise sources are excluded. However, even
if local shape variations are removed, the radiation of aerodynamic noise does not vanish
entirely. We cannot directly measure the amount of sound radiated from a car having
a smooth surface.
The upper limit value of aerodynamic noise radiated from smooth surfaced cars can
be estimated, however, based on the noise data measured with parabola apparatus.
The distance between the parabola apparatus and the car surface is about 3·6 m. The
data measured with the parabola apparatus is first transformed into the A-weighted
sound pressure level of the noise radiated from a unit area of a smooth surface, and the

Figure 15. The time history of the A-weighted one-third octave band ( f0 = 8 kHz) sound pressure level
measured with the parabola apparatus (train speed = 274 km/h).
       333
T 2
Estimated values of each noise contribution (dB(A)) (observed at the point P25 , elevated
structure height = 8–10 m, slab track, considering improved noise barriers and counter-
measures to aerodynamic noise)
Train speed (km/h)
ZXXXXXXXXCXXXXXXXXV
Each noise 240 300 350 400
Rolling noise and gear noise 64 67 69–70 72
Aerodynamic noise from the upper part of cars 60–62 66–67 70–71 74
Pantograph noise 62 68 72 74–75
Structure noise Q60 63 66 69
Total noise 68 72–73 76 79

level of power (PWLs ) radiated from a unit area of car surface is calculated by using an
uncorrelated plane noise source distribution model. The directivity of the sound radiation
is assumed to be cos u, where u is the angle between the sound radiation direction
and the normal to the surface. The resulting PWLs (V = 275 km/h) = 76·5 dB(A) is
obtained. The side surface of the train is replaced by a long plane strip (with height 3·5 m,
length = train length) on which the noise source is distributed uniformly. For example,
the noise level at a distance 25 m from the plane is then calculated to be 64·6 dB(A)
(V = 275 km/h). The influence of wheel/rail noise and aerodynamic noise from local
sources upon the parabola apparatus data are difficult to separate. The value obtained
above is therefore considered to be an upper limit.

5. INCREASING SPEED AND NOISE

As mentioned above, the noise of railway cars consists mainly of rolling noise, gear
noise, aerodynamic noise and concrete bridge structure noise. As the train speed increases,
the contribution of aerodynamic noise becomes more noticeable. However, the
aerodynamic noise can be reduced by using new cars which have a smooth surface,
although some problems concerning pantograph noise and others remain. It has been
shown that the aerodynamic noise has been reduced considerably by running test cars
developed for the proposed speed increases by JR Companies. The surfaces of the new
cars are as smooth as possible. On the basis of the noise data measured on the test cars,
the contributions of various aerodynamic noises generated from the new cars have
been estimated. A pantograph has been designed to reduce pantograph noise. The noise
generated from the smooth surfaced cars running alongside noise barriers with
sound-absorbing facings, absorbent tracks, have been estimated, and the results are
shown in Table 2. These results represent the potential minima A-weighted sound pressure
levels at P25 at each speed. From these results, we conclude that the highest speed at which
the wayside noise value is less than 75 dB(A) is about 350 km/h.

6. CONCLUSIONS
The noise generated from Shinakensen cars running at high speed and its control
have been described. Two solutions are proposed; the first is to reduce the noise without
considerable modifications to the cars, and the second is to reduce the noise with
substantial modification of the cars. It is evident that the noise reduction is limited
334 .   .
(when the usual noisebarriers are used) when the cars are not modified, because
aerodynamic noise is a principal part of Shinkansen noise. It is therefore necessary to
modify the car surface in order to reduce the noise. With speed increases, smoothing the
car surface is essential to keep the noise low. A new pantograph producing less
aerodynamic noise is being developed. By applying these methods, it is expected that
the maximum speed at which the wayside noise value is less than 75 dB(A) is about
350 km/h or a little more.

REFERENCES
1. Y. M et al. 1995 11th International Wheelset Congress, 10b. Rolling noise control in
high-speed Shinkansen.
2. M. A 1980 IEICE Technical Report EA80-54. Railway noise and its control.
3. K. M et al. 1985 Railway Technical Research Pre-Report No. A-85-50 (Japan).
4. K. M et al. 1986 Railway Technical Research Pre-Report No. 86-12 (Japan).
5. K. M et al. 1994 WCRR. Development of low noise pantograph.
6. Y. M et al. 1993 STECH’93. Aerodynamic noise of highspeed railway cars.