Proceedings of 2008 International Symposium on Electrical Insulating

Materials, September 7-11, 2008, Yokkaichi, Mie, Japan P1-38

Studying on Gnawing Testing Method of Rodent-Proof Wire and Cable

Yonghua Zhu*, Shen Wang, Mingzhu Li, Changshun Wu
Shanghai Electric Cable Research Institute, Jungong Road 1000, Shanghai 200093, China
Email: z_yonghua72@[Link]
ABSTRACT ˖ Detailed investigation on gnawing test results. Our investigation has taken a detailed
testing of Rodent-Proof wire and cable (RPWC) in discussion on laboratory-gnawing testing method in
laboratory is carried out in this paper. Most of test following parameters: rat category, sample choice and
parameters, such as the rat choice, sample preparation, preparation, testing procedure, long-term residual effect
test procedure and long-term residual effect test on test on repellent agent, as well as evaluation system of
repellent agents, as well as the evaluation system of test test result. Finally some suggestions on gnawing testing
result, are discussed. Finally, some proposals on method of RPWC are presented.
gnawing testing method of RPWC are presented.
Keywords˖Gnawing, Rat, Testing method, rodent-proof TEST CERIFICATION
wire and cable Rat choice
The rat family consists of many kinds of category, and
INTRODUCTION commonly known as mouse and rat according to their
Rats cause extensive damage to buried communication figure. The experimental rat seems a better choice for
cable, power lines, and household wires. Previous gnawing test for its stronger gnawing ability and larger
attempts to repel rats from gnawing have involved figure. From the biological point of view, rat in closed
physical barriers or chemical repellents. Many efforts colony category, including Wistar rat and
had been done since Bell Labs first sought to develop Sprague-Dawley (SD) rat, is closer to a natural state in
cable resistance to rodent damage in the 1940s˷1˹. In genetic composition. In this research, SD rat was
recent decade years, tough plastic or polymer compound selected for RPWC evaluation because of the following
mixed repellent agents were developed as cable sheath factors: 1) it has fierce temper, 2) it is fast adaption to
of RPWC in cable manufacturers. However, tough the environment and stronger resistance capacity, 3)
plastic is less used for poor extrusion processing. there is no great difference in different regions. Rats
Capsaicin has become the most tendency repellent agent have been gnawing hard objects in all its life to keep its
used in RPWC since it has been demonstrated efficacy incisor sharp and prevent undue growth. However,
as a seed treatment repellent for gray squirrels and the gnawing ability varies with growth process since teeth
microencapsulated capsaicin formulation was developed fully grow within five weeks after the birth.
for use as a rodent repellent˷2˹. Gnawing test is a Confirmatory test, shown in Table 1, was designed to
majority method to determine the repellent efficacy in verify the gnaw ability of SD rats in different stage.
the process of finding ways to protect buried cable from Experimental results and discussion
damage by wildlife. Both field-test evaluation and Part of cable samples after the gnawing test are showed
various laboratory gnawing tests are widely used. in figure1 (a) ~ (f), respectively. It should be noted that
However, more precise gnawing test method is 6-week-old rat and 52-week-old rat have a weaker
demanded to determine whether the RPWC has good gnawing ability and 10-week-old and 15-week old rats
repellent feature after these products are applied to have a much stronger gnawing ability. It also could be
commercial use. Field-test, which is the most realistic seen that female and males rat have a little difference in
way, is unfit for evaluation method for time-consuming, gnawing results. It is strongly suggested that
onerous and uncontrolled conditions which lead to 12-week-old male and female rats should be selected in
environment-dependence results. To our knowledge the gnawing testing method of RPWC considering of
laboratory-gnawing testing method of RPWC remains female and male rats co-existing in nature. Another
non-uniform, which results in poor comparability of the important phenomenon shown in the results is the

−334−
Table 1 The confirmatory test scheme.

Experimental Sprague-Dawley Rat (Clean level)

rats According to the growth characteristic, SD rats being 6-, 10-, 15-, 24- and 52-week-old, which means rats are
in young, mid and late stages of growth, prime and agedness, were used to cable gnawing test, respectively. 9
Male and 9 female rats at each stage (n=3 same sex /group in each of 6groups).
Cable sample PVC sheathed cable, and low-smoke halogen-free polyolefine sheathed cable; Outer diameters: 50mm, 33mm,
(repellent agent 23mm and 12mm, respectively; All samples were divided into 5 groups and each group has 30 cable samples.
free) Each sample is 30mm length and was sealed with copper tapes at both ends.
Testing 1. Gnawing test at 50mm-outer-diameter cables in 1st-3rd day; 2. Gnawing test at 33mm-outer-diameter cables
procedure in 4th-6th day; [Link] test at 23mm-outer-diameter cables in 7th-9th day; [Link] test at
12mm-outer-diameter cables in 10th-12th days; [Link] the test, all rats were allowed to drink freely and fed
on schedule.

of sample damage has a close relationship with sample RPWC is usually manufactured by extruding polymer
diameter. Cables with smaller diameter are more easily compound with repellent agent on ordinary insulated
gnawed and larger diameter samples have the natural cores in factory. That material slice sample with
rodent-proof properties. In this test, all test rats did not different loading levels will not be suitable is because
gnaw the samples with 50mm diameter, which may due gnawing degree has a close relation to the cable
to width limitation of rat mouth. It is suggested that the diameter. Pieces of completed cables sealed with copper
diameter of testing sample shall be appropriate in the tapes at both ends are suggested to be selected as testing
range of 20 to 30mm. sample, which simulates a cable being suffered in the
actual operation environment. The length of sample is
based on the length of rat cage, which is approximately
300mm in our experiment. In addition, comparison
sample, which is made of the same polymer compound
sheath (repellent agent free) with the same diameter,
should be provided to evaluate the cable diameter
(a) 10-week-old rat/ĭ33 (b) 52-week-old rat/ĭ33 contribution to gnaw-preventing degree.
Test procedure
There is some uncertainty in the current test procedure.
Among them are the laying ways of samples
(test/comparison), rat placement (male/female) and test
duration. These aspects have been investigated in detail
as follows.
(c) 10-week-old rat/ĭ23 (d) 52-week-old rat/ĭ23 1) Laying ways of samples
Generally, test samples and comparison samples could
be either put in a same rat cage or separately. It is found
that the rats would gnaw rather the comparison samples
than the test samples, which seems the comparison
sample have some shielding effect on the test samples.
In order to remove the shielding effect, a comparison
(e) 10-week-old rat/ĭ12 (f) 52-week-old rat/12 experiment, in which the test samples and comparison
Figure 1 sample remnant after the gnawing test samples were put in different cages, was carried out. It
Cable sample choice and preparation is shown in the comparison experiment that the

−335−
comparison samples will be completely gnawed through not the same for those samples with larger diameter
very soon, and the test samples will also be gnawed since rats will follow the penetration and chew into the
with incisor teeth marks left in surface or some sheath insulation and even to conductor; (2) The gnawing
even penetrated. It is suggested to put the test samples degree will not increase along with test duration if the
and comparison samples in separate cages for better repellent agent in the sheath is enough even for smaller
understanding the efficacy of RPWC compared with the diameter cable; (3) It is suggested that the diameter of
ordinary samples. test sample shall be less than 30mm and two-week test
2) Quantity / rat placement (male /female) duration is adequate.
The gnawing test results according to Table 1 having a Long term residual effect test on repellent agent
little difference between groups are not only because of Repellent agents used in cable industry must be
the sexual difference but also the individual difference. environment friendly, thermal and light stable,
A certain number of rats in group and samples groups weatherproof, low-cost and etc. However, repellent
should be provided to exhibit the representative results. effect and its long-term residual effect should be the
Two kinds of test procedures for rat placement were most important. Thus, compatibility test, in which the
used before. One is the samples are endured one week sample being aged at 373 K(100ć) in air oven for 7
of male rat gnawing, following with another week of days, is carried out followed by one week male and one
female rat gnawing test (that is 5 groups test samples week female rats gnawing test. The test results are
bite by female rats and 5 groups comparison sample bite shown in Table 2. It should be noted that the test
by male rats, then exchanged after one week); the other samples have a good repellent feature even after
is the samples are endured two weeks of male/female rat compatibility test. It might be due to the high thermal
gnawing totally (that is 3 groups of test (comparison) decomposition temperature of the repellent agent (more
samples bite by female rats and 3 groups of test than 573 K (300ć)).
(comparison) samples bite by male rats for two weeks, Evaluation system of test result
respectively) . Every group has 5 male (female) rats. The degree of sample damage was assessed and
The worst result in groups will be adopted as the test developed on the base of a previously described scale
result. It is shown that the latter one has the worst result ˷3˹.Three grades are assigned: (1) for no damaged
in all groups. Furthermore, it is difficult to distinguish observed or having light teeth marks with depth less
the contribution of male or female rats in the former one. than 1mm on the sample surface; (2) for chewing by rats
For the sake of clear description of test results, it is where the depth shall be not more than 50% of the
preferably suggested to carry out the test in the later thickness of the sheath; (3) for chewing by rats where
procedure of rat placement. the outer sheath had been penetrated. In the case of the
3) Test duration sample sheath thickness is less than 2mm, grade (1) will
Most tests were of two-week duration or terminated be described if the test sample has been chewed into the
when the sample was completely gnawed through. In depth of less than 1mm. However, it is not sufficient to
order to know whether the test period is appropriate and consider only the destroying depth of the sheath since
is possible to reduce, the degree of cable damage (such the test results have a close relation with the sample
as depth, width, percentage of remnant) was recorded diameter. Protection percentage is introduced to
and described everyday to determine whether the eliminate the diameter effect by comparing the result of
gnawing behavior of the rats is continuous or random. the test sample with the comparison sample. Herein, the
Following results can be obtained. (1) The sample, no protection percentage means the surface remnant on the
matter what kind of sample, will leave incisor teeth test sample minus the one on the comparison sample.
marks on its surface at the first day of testing. Surface In addition, environment friendly factor should be
damage degree of comparison sample with smaller considered for repellent agents. All samples should not
diameter is linear with the test duration. However, it is

−336−
Table 2 The result of long term residual effect test.
Resin material of No. (Damaged surface area /total surface area)(%) and destroy description
sample sheath cage Test sample
Comparison sample
Before aging After aging
Polyvinyl chloride 1 100% eaten up 5% / heavy teeth mark 1%/ heavy teeth mark
cable/ ĭ27 2 100% eaten up 1%/ heavy teeth mark 1%/ heavy teeth mark
3 100% eaten up 0/ a little light teeth mark 0/ a little light teeth mark
Low-smoke/halogen 1 100% eaten up 0/ a little light teeth marks 0/ a little light teeth mark
free Polyolefin 2 100% eaten up 0/ a little light teeth mark 0/ a little light teeth mark
cable/ĭ27 3 40% / chew into the 0/ a little light teeth mark 0/ a little light teeth mark
conductor
Neoprene rubber 1 100% eaten up 0/ a little light teeth mark 0/ a little light teeth mark
Cable/ĭ27 2 90% / chew into the 0/ a little light teeth mark 0/ a little light teeth mark
conductor
3 80% /chew into the 0/ a little light teeth mark 0/ a little light teeth mark
conductor
Polyethylene slice 1 100% eaten up 0/ a little light teeth mark in edge 0/ a little light teeth mark in edge
2 100% eaten up 0/ a little light teeth mark in edge 0/ a little light teeth mark in edge
3 100% eaten up 0/ a little light teeth mark in edge 0/ a little light teeth mark in edge

include any toxic material which will lead to the rat all the gnawing test should be carried out in a cleaning or even
death. Considering feeding and growth environment higher level environment; (6)Testing result evaluation: both
being very important to the health of testing rat, all the damage description and protection percentage should be used
gnawing test should be carried out in a cleaning or even to the testing result evaluation. It should be noted that all the
higher level environment. testing rats must not be died or intoxicated within the test.
SUGGESTIONS
After above confirmatory test and discussion, some ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
preliminary conclusions could be drawn: (1) age and weight of We wish to thank Shanghai Electric Cable Research
the testing rat: 12-week-old male(300±20g) or female SD rat Institute (SECRI) and Testing and Inspection Station for
˄250±20gĐ, which has much stronger gnawing ability, is cable and Wire (TICW) for financial support.
suitable for the gnawing test; (2) cable sample consideration:
the diameter of testing cable must be less than 30mm since REFERENCE
cable with outer diameter being greater than 30mm has more ˷1˹ Craig A. Remey, and Geraldine [Link].
prevention ability from rat’s gnawing; (3) Sample species and 1997. Evaluating cable resistance to pocket gopher
size: test samples and comparison samples should be provided damage- A review. 13th Great Plains Wildlife Damage
by the cable manufacturer simultaneously to confirm repellent Control Workshop Proceedings. Year 1997:107-110.
efficacy of RPWC. Since there is individual difference among ˷2˹ Stephen A. Shumake, Ray T. Sterner,
the testing rats, at least 6 test samples and 6 comparison Stainley E. Gaddis. Repellents to reduce cable gnawing
samples are selected respectively, to avoid the indeterminacy by north pocket gophers. The Journal of Wildlife
and randomicity of the test; (4) Rat arrangement and test Management, Vol.63 No.4,(Oct.,1999),pp.1344-1349.
duration: to ensure the accuracy of the test, male and female ˷3˹ McCann, G.R.1995. A method for evaluating
rat should be used to the test for two weeks, respectively; cable resistance to damage by pocket gophers as
(5)Testing environment: considering feeding and growth adopted by the USDA/APHIS/ADC/DWRC.
environment being very important to the health of testing rat, International Wire and Cable Symposium 44:604-606.

−337−