Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Since elapids have fixed fangs and their fangs don't get as large as vipers would a pair if durrable work gloves be able to stop a bite?

P.S. would never try it but just a thought.

Do an experiment; take a 1/4 inch needle and jab it into the glove you are thinking of....most likely, it will go through w/out any problems. I wouldn't trust a glove to stop a bite unless it was one very small elapid species (but if its that small, you are then losing maneuvability). With that being said, there are some good, thick gloves that do have certain applications but my feeling is that there really shouldn't be a need to use them if this type of snake is managed properly.

Rob Carmichael, Curator
The Wildlife Discovery Center
Lake Forest, IL

>>Since elapids have fixed fangs and their fangs don't get as large as vipers would a pair if durrable work gloves be able to stop a bite?
>>
>>P.S. would never try it but just a thought.
-----
Rob Carmichael, Curator
The Wildlife Discovery Center at Elawa Farm
Lake Forest, IL

I was thinking about such an experiment to test and see if a needle would go through that advice helps also, I kinda figured smaller species of elapids wouldn't be able to bite through the glove such as some of my favorite species coral snakes, and bandy bandys to bad you can't get bandy's here in america.

There is a company named Turtleskin that manufactures puncture resistant gloves. They work great!! Here is a link to a website that sells them.

http://www.warwickmills.com/Gloves.html

Thanks alot I'll check it out.

Check this link out. I have a pair of the Midwest Gloves though I almost never use them for anything.(Fathers day present from my wife)I find them cumbersome and uncomfortable. Formally in law enforcement I used a pair of Kevlar Puncture RESISTANT gloves. They are just that.They will help protect from a needle but not stop it. I also meet a guy at a hot show who had claimed to have been bitted through the glove by a med size n.nigricollis. I would be very cautious using these gloves.I think they might give people a false sense of security.............Trey

Here is the link

http://rs289.securehostserver.com/%7Etongscom/articles/index.php?Article=review_3.html

n/p
-----
1.1 Blackheaded pythons
1.1 Woma (Juvie female)
2.1 Aussie Olives
1.1 Timors
1.0 Angolan Juvie
1.1 Savu
1.1 Juvie Bloods
1.1 Juvie Balls
1.1 IJ Carpets
1.1 Coastal Carpets
1.2 Macklotts
1.1 Papuan Olives
1.0 Jungle Carpet
2.2 Scrubs (on breeding loan)
0.1 Jungle/Diamond cross
0.1 child, CB
0.1 wife, WC

That is correct, they are not puncture proof. They are puncture resistant, withstanding ten pounds of pressure from a 0.5 mm needle. I have used them many times in the field while restraining head movement in crotalids. On a couple of seperate occasions, snakes have flicked out a fang and landed it squarely on the surface of the glove, but no punctures resulted from this. I have also used them when administering oral antibiotics to snakes. Only once did I have an incident which had me a little concerned. I had to flip over a rock when we discovered a small 14 inch C.l.klauberi that had crawled under it. While grabbing the edge of the rock to turn it over, the snake bit the index finger of the glove an held on for about 3 to 4 seconds. I immediately pulled off the glove to check for a possible break in the material, but nothing happened. I would highly recommend against using any gloves, regardless of type, on a larger species such as B.gabonica.

I use a pair of Kevlar/elkskin gloves that are available through A.C.E.S.

They are better described as gauntlets as they cover up to the elbow. The hands are covered by kevlar and elkskin. The forearms are protected by kevlar only.

I use them when I need to work with my Beaded Lizards. I once was tagged by one of the beadeds. They were still rather young, but my skin was not broken. I always use these gloves when I work with them.

I haven't tried poking myself with a needle through them to test Front-fang venomous... but I don't keep them anyway.

Doug T
Doug Taylor Reptiles

It's a bit runny at slow speed, but when subject to fast movements, stops and gets hard immediately. They were showing it stopping an icepick. It was being used in a vest, but I'm sure it would work in gloves and boots, along with pants. Can't remember the name..it was 2 days ago that I saw it. Weird stuff.
-----
1.1 Blackheaded pythons
1.1 Woma (Juvie female)
2.1 Aussie Olives
1.1 Timors
1.0 Angolan Juvie
1.1 Savu
1.1 Juvie Bloods
1.1 Juvie Balls
1.1 IJ Carpets
1.1 Coastal Carpets
1.2 Macklotts
1.1 Papuan Olives
1.0 Jungle Carpet
2.2 Scrubs (on breeding loan)
0.1 Jungle/Diamond cross
0.1 child, CB
0.1 wife, WC

Yeah I saw it on a show about the olympics its supposed to be flexible plastic that molds and moves like putty but when it hits something it becomes rock hard.

That's it. They had a glob of it (looked like snot) that they were pulling out of the container, then they smacked the container, and it was solid. Weird Science, lol
-----
1.1 Blackheaded pythons
1.1 Woma (Juvie female)
2.1 Aussie Olives
1.1 Timors
1.0 Angolan Juvie
1.1 Savu
1.1 Juvie Bloods
1.1 Juvie Balls
1.1 IJ Carpets
1.1 Coastal Carpets
1.2 Macklotts
1.1 Papuan Olives
1.0 Jungle Carpet
2.2 Scrubs (on breeding loan)
0.1 Jungle/Diamond cross
0.1 child, CB
0.1 wife, WC

I've seen the Midwest gloves used sucessfully while handling Pig's & small Cottonmouths in Florida while field collecting. The fangs wer stopped cold and the venom ran down the surface of the gloves. It also did not give off a big IR signature, so the snake was less inclined to bite.

I've also seen tests of the "Turtleskin gloves" from ACES. I still think a hook and tube is a lot better option.

Bandy Bandys don't do well in captivity, they are very specialized feeders (Blind snakes only)according to the local herpers I worked with on my recent trip to Australia. They are better left free.

-----
Confidence is what you feel before you comprehend the situation.

That is fine with me but still it would be nice if they had a varied diet they are in my opinion a beautiful snake.

I once had a pair of smelting gloves that were puncture proof. They were made by a company called "TufNut", several layers of suede leather and with batting and stainless mesh in between. I trusted them completely with front fanged snakes. They OFTEN took solid bites from large male atrox and molossus.
Unfortunately they were stolen from my truck and I have not been able to locate the company or similar gloves. These were true "TufNuts" and took so many bites. The way I tested them was with a brad nail gun with @50 or so psi. I got them from a fireman. But, as far as I know they use totally different gloves now.
I have tried the needle test with about 10 different pairs of gloves (from welding to the animal capture ones) and none have passed the needle. I looked very hard for more "TufNuts" as it was a very nice way to deal with meds, feedings, capture, etc.

C'est La Vie. If I find another pair I will treat them like gold!

David

The material used to make the gloves that are made by Warwick Mills and others is snake resistant. We tested it on C. atrox and several other large powerful species. However, there is something that you need to be aware of: Every time a seam is put into the material, it is no longer resistant to fangs along that seam. If a fang were to hit at the seam and travel along the hole where the thread goes, it could puncture your finger. I know that Warwick doubles the material at the seams for their gaters and boots, but I doubt this is possible with gloves. We also did not test the material after wear and tear, cleaning, etc. We do NOT recommend using gloves to handle any venomous snake.
-Kristen
KY Reptile Zoo

Being in law enforcement.The current crop of kevlar glove's are up to the task thats demanded of them.The psi of a large C.atrox or similar is no where near the type of "pat down search" pressure that a large Crot or Naja would expose these gloves to.My opinion learn how to handle them ,properly!Glove's for other than neonates or pigmy's is a crutch.

We conducted a study a few years back testing the biting and striking power of various North American venomous. A large 6 ft C. adamanteus had the strongest bite at only .11 psi. and the hardest strike at only .19 psi. That is not very much power. Venomous snakes lack the jaw and neck strength that is found in constrictors. We have also used welding gloves to handle large WDBs and EDBs. You do a have a good valid point about herpers needing to learn to properly use tools and properly handle venomous, particularly elapids.

Aaron Cooper

>>A large 6 ft C. adamanteus had the strongest bite at only .11 psi. and the hardest strike at only .19 psi.

This sounds very unlikely to me. At the very least you are comparing very big apples to very small oranges. I could maybe buy .11 POUNDS of fource or possibly .11 PSI across the whole surface of the mouth, neither of which are of any consequence in context. The surface area of the tip of a fang is a tiny fraction of a square millimeter. An ounce of FORCE applied to a fang would easily equate to hundreds of PSI at the tip (I'd bet more like thousands), which is what counts when you're talking puncture resistance.

The psi does not change regardless of whether it is at the tip of a fang or across the span of the mouth. The only difference is the surface area, meaning that it is easier for the fang to use the same amount of pressure to puncture versus a broader surface area which would require a greater amount of pressure to puncture. Since the fangs are not in a fixed position on the maxillary bones, there is a minute, small amount of pressure loss when the snake bites. But it is not enough to have any bearing on the outcome of the study. This is a little off topic, but does any one know if they still sell venomous at the shows in Daytona?

Aaron Cooper

No hots this year at Daytona.
-----
1.1 Blackheaded pythons
1.1 Woma (Juvie female)
2.1 Aussie Olives
1.1 Timors
1.0 Angolan Juvie
1.1 Savu
1.1 Juvie Bloods
1.1 Juvie Balls
1.1 IJ Carpets
1.1 Coastal Carpets
1.2 Macklotts
1.1 Papuan Olives
1.0 Jungle Carpet
2.2 Scrubs (on breeding loan)
0.1 Jungle/Diamond cross
0.1 child, CB
0.1 wife, WC

>>The psi does not change regardless of whether it is at the tip of a fang or across the span of the mouth.

Um...yes, it does. In spite of it's cronic misuse on TV when they mean "pounds" of force, PSI stands for "Pounds per Square Inch" of pressure, and so it matters very much.

>>The only difference is the surface area,

Yes, by a factor of many thousands of times...

>>meaning that it is easier for the fang to use the same amount of pressure

No, the same amount of force...

>>to puncture versus a broader surface area which would require a greater amount of pressure to puncture.

Yes, by a factor of many thousands...

>>Since the fangs are not in a fixed position on the maxillary bones, there is a minute, small amount of pressure loss when the snake bites. But it is not enough to have any bearing on the outcome of the study.

Agreed, this is insignificant.

You have no idea what you are talking about. If a snake could exert thousands of pounds of pressure from the tip of its fangs as you claim, it would literally penetrate right through the bone. Dr. Brady Barr, from National Geographic, just recently conducted an experiment to compare the biting pressure in psi of various animals. Here are the results of his study:

Humans: 120 lbs

Domestic dogs: 320 lbs

Wild dogs: 310 lbs

Lions: 600 lbs

White sharks: 600 lbs

Hyenas: 1000 lbs

Snapping turtles: 1000 lbs

Crocodiles: 2500 lbs

Now, ask yourself this simple question.....Do you really believe that an EDB or a WDB has more bite pressure than a crocodile? I hope that you really don't believe in what you are claiming. If you do, then maybe you should get your head checked. But thanks for the good laugh

I assure you I know that I am talking about.

I saw Dr. Barr's show and it's the first I've seen by someone who actually understands what I've been trying to explain. The fact that you think it contradicts what I said tells me that you have not understood me (or Dr. Barr). Note that he correctly gave his numbers in lbs (pounds) and even correctly referred to the instrument he used to take measurements as a strain gauge (a type of force gauge), NOT a pressure gauge. I am certain that this is what you used to take your measurements.

Force and pressure are NOT the same thing, although the two words are often incorrectly used interchangably. If I failed to make that clear (I thought it was obvious), please reread my posts with that in mind and maybe they'll make more sense.

Lets take an example:

Say you have an object that is a 10 inch cube and weighs 10 pounds.

If you lay that object on a large flat surface (say a table), it applies 10 POUNDS OF FORCE to the surface. That force is spread over 100 SQUARE INCHES. The PRESURE exerted on the table is:

10 pounds/100 square inches = 0.1 pounds per square inch (psi)

Now, instead of laying the object directly on the table, set it on top of a smaller object, say a 1 inch cube of negligible weight sitting on the table. Now the FORCE applied to the table remains the same (10 pounds) but the PRESSURE exerted on the one square inch of table where the small block is resting is:

10 pounds/1 square inch = 10.0 psi

Note that without changing the amount of FORCE, the pressure was increased by a factor of 100 simply by concentrating all the FORCE in a smaller area. This is what happes when you consider the difference between a given bite force (what Dr. Barr measured) spread across the surface area of a snake's mouth as opposed to only at the tips of the fangs, except that the difference in surface area is MUCH greater.

Also, note that while the legs of the table need not be stronger in the second example, the surface of the table must be made of either stronger or thicker material to resist being punctured at the area of contact. That's why things like kevlar gloves are rated in PSI and not POUNDS.

I'll hold off on addressing you're misguided insult or comparing my physics and advanced math background to yours until you've read and responded to this...

>>I assure you I know that I am talking about.

Of course, I didn't say anything about being able to type.

"that" -> "what"

I agree, the physics back up your information. Which amounts to proof and I must say very well calculated and explained.
The other thing to take into account is the whiplike action of a "punching" strike like vipers. This would of course add much more penetration power to the tip of the fang. Similar to a whip that is thrown at you and one that is whipped at you.

David

Larry, I have spoken to several people about your claims. I wanted to find out what animal has the highest psi biting power per tooth. I contacted the Oceanic Institute and several others. They notified me that the dusky shark has the highest pound per square inch of biting pressure per tooth at 132 psi. Calculated across the entire mouth, it totaled around 6000 psi. I also explained to them that you believed that the WDB or the EDB had over a few thousand psi per fang of biting power. They said that it impossible, and the only animal that could have possibly had that much biting power would have been a T-rex which is extinct. I guess that you must not have been paying attention in your "physics" classes.

Aaron Cooper

>>They notified me that the dusky shark has the highest pound per square inch of biting pressure per tooth at 132 psi. Calculated across the entire mouth, it totaled around 6000 psi.

They are giving you numbers in POUNDS, not POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH. That doesn't mean they don't know what they are talking about, just that they are being rather loose with their units. That's like saying your car has four tires with 35 psi of pressure in each one for a total of 140 psi... PSI is force DEVIDED BY area...

I suspect you may be hung up on the idea that I'm implying a rattlesnake has a stronger bite than a shark for instance. I'm saying no such thing. I'm saying that you're missing the differnce between force and pressure and the scale of the pressures involved in punturing something with a sharp object.

You started by saying that you measured a rattlesnake bite at 0.11 psi, but I don't think you understand what an incredibly small number that is. That's less than 1% of atmosperic pressure. I don't think that's enough to puncture a soap bubble let alone human skin (which rattle snakes seem to be able to do). My blood pressure runs somewhere around 1.8 psi (125 mm Hg). If 0.11 psi were enough to puncture human skin I would have exploded in a cloud of red mist long ago...

>>I guess that you must not have been paying attention in your "physics" classes.

True, but the professor would wake me up when he was having trouble understanding something and needed me to help him out. I was able to skip the final and still get an A since I had a nearly perfect score up to that point. I did have to pay attention in Calc II even when I wasn't helping the professor find his mistakes, but still aced it in an accelerated summer class. That was my first math class after being out of school for 11 years, so I actually had to study a little.

Seriously, while my understanding of General Relativity is a bit shakey, this is 8th grade science class material... I honestly don't know how to make it any simpler than my last post...

Note that I'm NOT saying that you are dumb, simply that the application of this particular concept is escaping you for the moment.

Sorry Aaron, Larry is 100% right on this one. Pounds of pressure does NOT equal PSI.

"They notified me that the dusky shark has the highest pound per square inch of biting pressure per tooth at 132 psi. Calculated across the entire mouth, it totaled around 6000 psi."

Right there tells me that you don't fully understand the difference between pounds of pressure and PSI. It is impossible for the entire mouth of the animal to have a larger PSI than the tip of the tooth. Given an equal amount of force, the smaller the area, the higher amount of pressure on that area. It's an inverse relationship.

Pounds of pressure and Newtons (a common term for force) can be interconverted (I'm not sure the factor off hand)...PSI and Newtons are NOT interconverted because PSI incorperates an additional area term.

Thus, the amount of FORCE a front fanged snake exerts may be small, but due to the very very small AREA it exerts this FORCE on, the PRESSURE is incredibly high.

I hope this helped.

Matt

OMG!
Larry is right on something?
Watch out, he'll be getting a new hat size!
LOL!
j/k Larry!

Randal

Well, both of you guys are wrong. I contacted Dr R. Aidan Martin, the Director of the ReefQuest Centre for Shark Research. He stated that all animal bites are calculated in the same fashion. He also stated that bite pressure would be the same regardless of surface area. He also stated that the smaller surface (fang tip) area only concentrates the same amount of force and pressure into a smaller area, which allows the animal to puncture the skin more easily. If you want to debate the issue with him, here is his e-mail address: r.aidan.martin@elasmo-research.org. I also contacted some companies who make gloves that are resistant to 12 pounds of pressure from a hyperdermic needle. They say that the needle will break before it can go through the fabric. They also said that the gloves would stop a venomous snake bite. The same company also makes snake chaps and other protective clothing. They stated that it would be impossible for a snake to have thousands of pounds of pressure on the tip of the fang. If it did, then the fangs would go right through the gloves, and then right through you.

Aaron Cooper

Matt, this information came directly from the research website:

"In one bite test the highest force applied by a single tooth was 60 kilograms (132 pounds). Since it was estimated that the 60 kilograms were applied over an area of 2 square millimeters (tip of tooth), this means a loading of 30 kilograms per square millimeter. This equates to a force of 3 metric tons (6,000 pounds) per square centimeter, or 15 metric tons (30,000 pounds) per square inch."

I simply made a mistake in saying that it was 6000 psi when it was actually 30,000 psi.

Aaron Cooper

albolabris wrote...

"He stated that all animal bites are calculated in the same fashion. He also stated that bite pressure would be the same regardless of surface area. He also stated that the smaller surface (fang tip) area only concentrates the same amount of force and pressure into a smaller area, which allows the animal to puncture the skin more easily."

you just confirmed what Larry has been trying to tell you..

"He stated that all animal bites are calculated in the same fashion. He also stated that bite pressure would be the same regardless of surface area."
=
BITE FORCE

"He also stated that the smaller surface (fang tip) area only concentrates the same amount of force and pressure into a smaller area, which allows the animal to puncture the skin more easily."
=
PSI
Aaron, truly without insult...you are just not grasping the difference of the two.

PSI is over used and improperly stated on most television shows.
The two really have no place in the same discussion. They are two completely different topics.

Why don't you copy and paste Larry's very explanative post above and email it to your experts and see if they agree?
T-

I did copy and send every single post including mine.

Not true. Go back and read Larry's posts one more time. He is stating the exact opposite. He believes that the smaller the surface area, the more pressure (thousands of pounds according to Larry) that is applied. Tonight, I also spoke by phone with the curator of the Museum of Natural History in the city I live in. He also said that the notion of a snake having thousands of pounds of pressure (not psi, but pounds of pressure as Larry is claiming) is absurd. He also stated that even a single pound of pressure is absurd. As far as I am concerned, I believe the experts with whom I have spoken to. No offense to any of you, but those guys have years of experience dong these kinds of studies. It has been a very interesting debate though. I won't respond to any more replies because I have a lot of important things to do. I am about to move to Florida and have to get my stuff prepared. Larry, Matt, Taphillip and every one else, take care.

Aaron Cooper

>>I won't respond to any more replies because I have a lot of important things to do.

No problem. I'll try to reach your experts, and report back (in a new thread) after I've straightened them out...

>>He [Larry] believes that the smaller the surface area, the more pressure (thousands of pounds according to Larry) that is applied.

Ugh. Yes, by definition (except in psi, because pounds is not a measure of pressure).

>>of pounds of pressure (not psi, but pounds of pressure as Larry is claiming) is absurd.

No, no, no. I am claiming no such thing and have stated so as clearly as I possibly can. I have been very careful and I think very clear. I am talking psi, not pounds. The whole thing I'm trying to get across to you is that you and the experts you have contacted are saying psi when what you really mean is pounds of force. The fact that you just used the phrase "pounds of pressure" tells me it may be a lost cause because that phrase has no meaning in a scientific context. You might as well say "feet of time".

>>I believe the experts with whom I have spoken to. No offense to any of you, but those guys have years of experience dong these kinds of studies.

I'm sure they do, and I'm sure they are very knowledgable about a great many things of which I am ignorant, but you are contacting biologists to mediate a physics argument...