How can you test if an ultrasonic mouse repeller works? - briefly
Place the device in a sealed test area and record mouse activity with infrared cameras or motion detectors while it is off and then on. A marked decrease in entries or time spent in the area during operation confirms the repeller’s efficacy.
How can you test if an ultrasonic mouse repeller works? - in detail
Testing the performance of an ultrasonic rodent deterrent requires a systematic approach that isolates the device’s acoustic output and observes rodent behavior under controlled conditions.
First, establish a baseline. Record rodent activity in the target area for at least 24 hours without the device operating. Use motion‑activated cameras or live‑trap counts to quantify visits, foraging, and nesting. Document the number of sightings, timestamps, and locations.
Second, install the unit according to the manufacturer’s specifications—typically at a height of 30–45 cm, away from solid surfaces that could reflect or absorb sound. Verify power supply and ensure the indicator shows active emission.
Third, repeat the observation period with the device turned on for an equivalent duration. Maintain identical environmental factors (temperature, lighting, food availability). Compare the post‑installation data to the baseline:
- Total rodent detections (camera or trap records)
- Frequency of visits per hour
- Duration of each visit
- Evidence of nesting or damage
A statistically significant reduction—generally a 30 % drop or more—indicates functional efficacy.
Fourth, corroborate acoustic output. Employ a calibrated ultrasonic meter or a frequency‑responsive microphone to measure sound pressure level (SPL) at multiple distances (0.5 m, 1 m, 2 m). Record the dominant frequency range (typically 20–65 kHz) and ensure SPL remains above the threshold required to affect rodents (≈80 dB SPL at 1 m). Document any attenuation caused by furniture, walls, or flooring.
Fifth, conduct a control test. Place an identical device that has been disabled (e.g., battery removed) in the same location and repeat the observation cycle. Lack of change during this phase confirms that observed effects are attributable to ultrasonic emission rather than environmental variation.
Finally, evaluate long‑term performance. Run weekly checks for at least four weeks, noting any habituation indicated by a gradual return of activity levels. If rodents resume normal patterns, consider rotating frequencies (if the model permits) or supplementing with additional deterrents.
Summarize findings in a table that lists baseline metrics, active‑device results, acoustic measurements, and control outcomes. The comparative data provide a clear, quantitative assessment of whether the ultrasonic repeller functions as intended.