Riddex Plus pest control device

  • Thread starter Thread starter Greg Bernhardt
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Control Device
Click For Summary
The discussion centers around the effectiveness of ultrasonic pest repellers, particularly the Riddex device, which claims to repel rodents and insects through patented pulse technology. Many participants express skepticism, citing personal experiences where similar devices failed to deter pests, with some even noting that they attracted more issues. The Federal Trade Commission has prohibited the sale of Riddex units due to their ineffectiveness, and users recommend traditional methods like traps and bait as more reliable solutions. Some individuals report success with other ultrasonic devices, but the consensus leans towards skepticism regarding their claims. Overall, the conversation highlights a preference for proven pest control methods over unverified electronic solutions.
  • #31
Hmm, this is strange.. I've actually heard pretty good things about the http://www.riddex.org/" Plus. I have a buddy who swears by them. It seems like a lot of people have an opinion in this thread, but not a lot of people have actually used them themselves. Has anyone out there actually used one?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32


I found the TV ad for this device implausible. For it to work by sending any kind of signal over the house wiring would require the target organism to have some kind of receiver, responsive to the radiated signal. Three types of radiated signal come to mind: electric field, magnetic field, and acoustic field caused by mechanical vibration of the conductors, which could result from an AC magnetic field.

The ad claims that each unit covers one floor of a building. Clearly this has to depend on how the building is wired. If each floor has a single branch line from a common fuse or breaker box, then at least the required topology is satisfied. How many homes would conform to this? I believe most homes have at least the ground floor divided up into multiple separate lines from the central fuse/breaker box. Coverage would either be limited to a single branch circuit or else include multiple floors. This was the part of the ad that seemed to me the least plausible.

All of the wiring in my new (unfinished) home is BX (spiral sheathed) cable. I doubt any significant electric field would radiate from this wiring. Even with unshielded cable, unless the wire length is a significant fraction of a wavelength (say, > wavelength/20) the only significant electric field would be in the space between the conductors. If the cable length is 100 feet from the fuse box to the device, this corresponds to a minimum frequency of around 500 KHz. Shorter lengths would require higher frequencies. Can mice, cockroaches, etc. detect this? Also, since electric field is produced by voltage rather than current, and at 500 KHz the transformer out on the pole would present a rather high source impedance, the voltage signal would be essentially the same across every branch circuit served by the same transformer. It wouldn't matter which floor or branch circuit the unit was on. It could be even in another house served by the same transformer.

What about magnetic radiation? Since the currents in the two conductors are in opposite directions, they produce opposing magnetic fields. Magnetic radiation would be detectable only very close to the cable, such that one conductor is significantly closer to the receiver than the other conductor. Only the portion of the cable which carries current to the device would radiate any magnetic field signal. To maximize coverage, the device would therefore have to be as far as possible from the fuse/breaker box. While many organisms are sensitive to magnetic fields, I believe only their navigation is affected. I have no idea whether they can detect AC fields.

The last possibility I considered was acoustic radiation from the conductors due to the force from their magnetic fields. The conductors repel each other with a force proportional to the current squared (correct me on this, somebody, if necessary). If the device works at all in accordance with the claim that the house wiring delivers the signal to the receiving organisms, this seems to me the most likely modality. Since coverage would depend upon how far the device is, along the wiring, from the fuse/breaker panel, it would also account for some of the inconsistent results reported by various users.

I recall a childhood experience which seems to support this hypothesis. I was in the basement using my father's old, rather large, electric soldering iron. My mother was upstairs using either the vacuum cleaner or the electric mixer, I don't remember which. I could hear the electrical noise from the appliance as a sound emanating from the soldering iron! It was unmistakable because I could hear the appliance upstairs varying in speed and simultaneously hear the sound from the iron. I wasn't about to take my father's soldering iron apart to investigate (hey, it still works 50 years later), but I suspect that the heating element is coiled and the current through it was modulated by voltage noise across the power line. The impedance of the transformer outside the house would have permitted the relatively small ripple current through the appliance to produce this voltage signal. The modulated current in the heating element produced a modulated magnetic field which produced vibration, which produced the sound.

So how much sound would emanate from the house wiring? Probably not much, and it depends on the current signal. If the device injects a current signal into the power line, it must be at a voltage sufficient to pass this current through the impedance of the line at that frequency. This impedance, for high frequency sounds, is rather high if it's determined by only the transformer on the pole. But that's never the case - it depends on other equipment connected to the line. This would be another reason for inconsistent results from different users.
 
  • #33
New to this forum, and didn't see any "edit previous post" button. I mentioned above that the power line's impedance (I meant at frequencies of a few KHz or higher) is very dependent on loads connected across the line. It occurs to me that in the recommended installation there would be more than one Riddex Plus unit connected. I wonder if each unit contains a "wave trap" which presents a very low impedance across the line at the signal frequencies. This way each unit would be loaded by all the others, ensuring as high a current signal as the design supports.

Another thought: I've heard at least two sound-generating devices made for this purpose, which had speakers and weren't designed to use the house wiring for communication with the pests. One type makes a clicking sound at long intervals. Another makes a chorus of what I'd classify as squeaking noises. Since the repulsive force between the power line conductors is proportional to current squared, it would suffice to generate a high frequency carrier and amplitude-modulate it with the sound signal. The square-law would serve as an AM demodulator (detector, to EE's and Hams). This would simplify the wave-trap design (if it has one). The ad's reference to "digital pulses" can mean a lot of things pertaining to the internals, and hopefully doesn't imply an attempt to send digital messages to the varmints!

I'm curious enough to put an oscilloscope across the line and look at the signal, but not curious enough to buy a unit to generate a signal to look at. Guess I'll wait for somebody to discard one in my direction:wink:.
 
  • #34
Some things need to be de-invented. If this thing DOES work, denies you of that oh, so satisfying "SNAP".

yes, I'm cruel when it comes to varmints in the house[/size]
 
  • #35
I have read the FTC ACTION against Riddex and I cannot believe the FTC is still allowing the advertising! DONT GIVE UP ON ELECTRONIC PEST CONTROL HOWEVER...I found a product called the that has NO FTC ACTIONS ad is the only product of its kind that did a 5 year University study to prove the efficacy on mice, rats, and roaches. I found this product whe researching chemical and pesticide free alternatives because my son has asthma and chemicals are a no-no, plus there are now substantial proven links of indoor pesticides to Children's Leukemia, Parkinson's disease, ADHD, and children's cognitive development.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #36
katndylan said:
... plus there are now substantial proven links of indoor pesticides to Children's Leukemia, Parkinson's disease, ADHD, and children's cognitive development.

Claims like this should be supported by links to peer-reviewed research here.

As for methods of eradicating rats and mice that won't exacerbate your son's asthma, good old snap traps will work, as will warfarin-containing baits (assuming you have places to put it or your child is old enough that he won't try eating it for himself).

For roaches, they themselves can exacerbate asthma. There are also pesticide baits for those that aren't aerosolized (i.e., not breathed in) that are good for households with asthmatics. Even if you have to go stay in a hotel for a weekend while the house is treated, it's better to get rid of roaches to alleviate asthma than to keep letting them thrive with less effective methods.
 
  • #37
katndylan said:
I have read the FTC ACTION against Riddex and I cannot believe the FTC is still allowing the advertising! DONT GIVE UP ON ELECTRONIC PEST CONTROL HOWEVER...I found a product called the that has NO FTC ACTIONS ad is the only product of its kind that did a 5 year University study to prove the efficacy on mice, rats, and roaches. I found this product whe researching chemical and pesticide free alternatives because my son has asthma and chemicals are a no-no, plus there are now substantial proven links of indoor pesticides to Children's Leukemia, Parkinson's disease, ADHD, and children's cognitive development.

This entire post reads like an advertisement. "Yelling" for effect; disparaging one product while promoting another; appeals to authorities without naming them -- the omnipresent capital U University at which there was a supposed "5 year study" but which university in which department for what, who knows. The scare tactics Bad Things Will Happen to Your Children!111! It's like a late-night infomercial.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #38
GeorginaS said:
This entire post reads like an advertisement. "Yelling" for effect; disparaging one product while promoting another; appeals to authorities without naming them -- the omnipresent capital U University at which there was a supposed "5 year study" but which university in which department for what, who knows. The scare tactics Bad Things Will Happen to Your Children!111! It's like a late-night infomercial.

you are correct, it is spam. typical pattern of one post made on the same day registered.
 
  • #39
NO, no infomercial or spam..the test was done at Jacksonville State in Alabama by Mark E. Meade, PhD. Assistant Professor, Department of Biology and it was done on the behavior of mice, rats, and roaches when exposed to low intensity electromagnetic fields(LEMF).
I have a son with severe asthma and the company provided me with all the documentation because I care about protecting my child and my home andafter being duped by the Riddex product as a consumer, I was not going to makwe the same mistake twice...and for the record, I have not had to spray indoor in almost two years and we have avoided our monthly breathing treatments after pest control visits. Believe what you want. I tried it, I researched thoroughly, and I am very satisfied with the results
 
  • #40
katndylan said:
NO, no infomercial or spam..the test was done at Jacksonville State in Alabama by Mark E. Meade, PhD. Assistant Professor, Department of Biology and it was done on the behavior of mice, rats, and roaches when exposed to low intensity electromagnetic fields(LEMF).
I have a son with severe asthma and the company provided me with all the documentation because I care about protecting my child and my home andafter being duped by the Riddex product as a consumer, I was not going to makwe the same mistake twice...and for the record, I have not had to spray indoor in almost two years and we have avoided our monthly breathing treatments after pest control visits. Believe what you want. I tried it, I researched thoroughly, and I am very satisfied with the results


Bold mine. The company self-reported to you. That's hardly impartial evidence.

The rest of what you've written is anecdotal evidence. I can make any claim I want on the Internet too. However, if you're happy with the product, then that's what counts.
 
  • #41


please be sure to have accurate facts when you are quoting someone. the ftc has not prohibited the sale of these units, they have simply told the company that they cannot make claims without scientific proof. which if u do some checking you will find they (the FTC) says to anyone that is marketing/manufacturing a product that they cannot control.
 
  • #42
informercials makes everything sound or look too good to be true. That is their purpose. I agree with others, do research before using or buying a product that is unknown.
 
  • #43
Most of you are scientists with laboratories. Have any of you experimented with this electronic pest control device? If so, please give me a link to your lab results. My boss wants me to place them in our company offices instead of using pesticides.

Thank you and looking forward to reading your lab results.

newbie to forum
 
  • #44
The general experiment with these devices is to buy one, see if it works. Doubt there'd be much in the way of lab results. To get those you'd need to go to the companies themselves.
 
  • #45
numbersguy said:
If so, please give me a link to your lab results. My boss wants me to place them in our company offices instead of using pesticides.

I'm getting a mental picture of some rodents reading the lab results pinned to your office notice board and saying "OMG, we'd better get outta here real fast..." :smile:
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K