taregg
- 70
- 0
How many hertz can kill a flying house insects...
The discussion revolves around the question of what frequency (in hertz) can effectively kill flying house insects using sound waves. Participants explore various theories, potential applications, and the practicality of using sound waves, particularly ultrasound, as a means of insect control.
Participants express a range of views, with no consensus on the effectiveness or practicality of using sound waves to kill flying insects. Some support the idea of resonant frequencies, while others challenge its feasibility and safety.
Participants note limitations in the discussion, including the dependence on specific insect characteristics, the complexity of resonance in biological tissues, and the potential risks associated with high-power sound waves.
SteamKing said:If you get a bug zapper, only 60 (electrical) Hz is required to kill a bug. If you try to zap a bug with sound waves, you could wind up zapping yourself.
You could, however, get a copy of that Chinese patent and swat the bug with it. That would probably be more effective.
Read www.hse.gov.uk/research/crr_pdf/2001/crr01343.pdf, and proceed at your own risk.SteamKing said:It's not clear that radiated sound energy powerful enough to zap a bug won't zap a human or a critical part of a human, like an ear, or objects in the room.
taregg said:How many hertz can kill a flying house insects...
Lok said:An impossible task that is. Although there is a small chance of a "kill" frequency (or multiple combined frequencies) to exist it will only be valid for one exact fly, as small anatomical differences will require a totally different frequency.
As stated by ChrisVer a fly is not a clean material so a sound wave will bounce and be absorbed by any tissue with a different speed of sound, thereby easily reducing the chance of resonance. Like "resonating" a box filled with sand.
Bobbywhy said:You seem to have missed the "sweeping of frequencies" technique. This method insures that the insect will be insonified by the correct resonant frequency, at least momentarily.
Bobbywhy said:These passages from the above paper indicate no risk from exposure to airborne ultrasonic frequencies to humans whatsoever:
"For ultrasonic components above 20 kHz, the limits were set to avoid hearing damage in the
audible (lower) frequencies. One-third-octave band levels of 105-115 dB were observed to
produce no temporary hearing loss, and were therefore judged non-hazardous in respect of
permanent hearing damage."