Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Managing TMR Variation

6,912 views

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology, Business

Managing TMR Variation

  1. 1. Improving Feeding Consistency and Efficiency with TMR Audits DAIReXNET Webinar Dr. Tom Oelberg, Ph.D. toelberg@diamondv.com
  2. 2. Outline <ul><li>What Is A TMR Audit </li></ul><ul><li>Factors that Contribute to TMR Variation </li></ul><ul><li>Managing Ingredient variation and shrink </li></ul><ul><li>Labor Efficiencies </li></ul><ul><li>Summary of Diamond V TMR Audit Data </li></ul>
  3. 3. 4 Rations <ul><li>Ration formulated </li></ul><ul><li>Ration that is mixed </li></ul><ul><li>Ration the cow consumes </li></ul><ul><li>Ration that is pushed out </li></ul>
  4. 4. What Is A TMR Audit? <ul><li>Value-added service provided by Diamond V </li></ul><ul><li>An on-farm evaluation of the </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Feed Storage and Preparation, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Mixing and Delivery of the TMR </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Ingredient Variation and Shrink </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Utilization of Labor and Resources </li></ul></ul>Reduce Variation and Improve Efficiency
  5. 5. TMR Audit Tools <ul><li>Feeding Software TMR Batch Summaries </li></ul><ul><li>“ Help Us Focus on Issues” </li></ul><ul><li>Feed Supervisor </li></ul><ul><li>TMR Tracker </li></ul><ul><li>EZ-Feed </li></ul><ul><li>Feed Watch </li></ul><ul><li>Others </li></ul><ul><li>Digital camera with video capabilities </li></ul><ul><li>Penn State Shaker box </li></ul><ul><li>Stop watch </li></ul><ul><li>Quart-sized Zip-loc bags </li></ul><ul><li>One-cup sized scoop </li></ul><ul><li>Grain sieves </li></ul><ul><li>Thermometer </li></ul><ul><li>Infrared camera </li></ul><ul><li>Data collection sheets </li></ul>
  6. 6. <ul><li>10 samples per load </li></ul><ul><li>Penn State Shaker Box Used on each Sample </li></ul><ul><li>Samples of Weighbacks to compare to TMR </li></ul><ul><li>Calculate average and coefficient of variation (CV) for each load </li></ul><ul><li>The CV is a measure of consistency…lower the better </li></ul><ul><li>Top 25% loads of TMR have 3% CV or less </li></ul>Penn State Shaker Box To Measure TMR Particle Size Variation
  7. 7. Well Mixed TMRs Obtained By Different Methods Twin-twin screw vertical wagon Mixed with payloader turning pile 5 times Horizontal auger reel mixer
  8. 8. “ Feed Particles Mix When Falling Together At the Same Time” “ Any ingredient or process that interferes with this will affect TMR consistency”
  9. 9. TMR Consistency Results via Penn State Shaker Box Test Goal: < 5% CV for Middle and Bottom Screens
  10. 10. An Inconsistent Lactation Ration
  11. 11. Contributing Factors to TMR Variation Dirty Dozen <ul><li>Capacity </li></ul><ul><li>Mixing Times </li></ul><ul><li>Equipment Wear </li></ul><ul><li>Hay Quality & Processing </li></ul><ul><li>Unlevel TMR Loading </li></ul><ul><li>Pre Batch Variation </li></ul><ul><li>Grain Particle Size Variation </li></ul><ul><li>Ingredient Inclusion Amt </li></ul><ul><li>Ingredient Mix Order </li></ul><ul><li>Loading Liquids </li></ul><ul><li>Deliver Times </li></ul><ul><li>Silage Face Management </li></ul>
  12. 12. Horizontal Reel Mixer Overfilled? Video One
  13. 13. Horizontal Reel Properly Mixing Video Two
  14. 14. Proper Mixing Action For A Vertical Wagon Courtesy: Supreme International website
  15. 15. Supreme International’s Feedlot Auger
  16. 16. Supreme International’s Forage Processing Auger
  17. 17. Over-Filling Causes TMR Variation
  18. 18. Case 1. Over-Filled Kuhn-Knight Reel-Auger Model 3700
  19. 19. Penn State Shaker Box Results Lactation Rations Load 1 Over-filled Load –Lactation Ration TMR felt drier
  20. 20. Penn State Shaker Box Results Lactation Rations Load 2 Over-filled Load –Lactation Ration TMR Felt Drier
  21. 21. Penn State Shaker Box Results Lactation Rations Load 4 Normal Filled Load – Lactation Ration
  22. 22. TMR Consistency Results via Penn State Shaker Box Test Oelberg. 2009. Reducing load size on Kuhn-Knight Reel-Auger Model 3700 reduced variation (CV %)
  23. 23. Case 1. TMR Consistency of Over-filled vs. Normal-filled Reel-Auger Mixer Oelberg. 2009. Courtesy to Hubbard Feeds, Mankato, MN for providing lab analysis Kuhn-Knight Reel-Auger Model 3700
  24. 24. Close-up Mixing…Mineral Mix Hanging Up on Screws
  25. 25. Load Size Too Small Mineral Not Completely Delivered To the Close-up Dry Cows
  26. 26. Proper Mixing Time Reduces Variation Harner et.al. 1995 K-State MF-2503 5% CV after 5 to 6 minutes
  27. 27. Count Down To Mix Last Added Ingredient
  28. 28. Sharp vs Dull Blade
  29. 29. Effect of Dull Knives on Large Round Bale Processing Oelberg. 2008. Dry Cow Ration
  30. 30. Effect of New Knives on Large Round Bale Processing Dry Cow Ration Replacement Heifer Ration
  31. 31. Wear and Stress Fractures on Edge Deflectors (Kicker Plates) Video Three
  32. 32. Worn Augers Video Four
  33. 33. Mixing Large Rounds of Alfalfa…Tough Middle Core
  34. 34. Haylage Clumps
  35. 35. Inconsistent Nutrient Consumption of a Poorly Mixed Fresh Cow TMR Video Five
  36. 36. Improper TMR Loading Causes Under-Processed Hay Not Loading On Center Loading On Center… Line Up on The Red Triangle
  37. 37. Hay Not Loaded Between Augers Causing It To Not Get Completely Processed
  38. 38. Hay Not Getting Completely Processed
  39. 39. Under-Processing Hay “Big Factor”
  40. 40. Clumps of Under-Processed Hay In TMRs
  41. 41. Penn State Shaker Box Results Load 1, Mix 1 min Restrictors Out Load 3, Mix 3 min Restrictors Out Load 4, Mix 3 min Restrictors In
  42. 42. Influence of Adjusting Hay Restrictor Settings and Load Mixing Time On TMR Particle Size Consistency Goal: 5% CV or less for Middle/Bottom Screens
  43. 43. Results of Processing Hay Ahead of Time <ul><li>Previous slides showed dairymen that extra mixing time did not reduce forage particle size </li></ul><ul><li>Convinced him to process all hay needed for the day ahead of time and dump in a pile </li></ul><ul><li>Loaded processed hay from pile faster and more accurately resulting in a more consistent TMR </li></ul><ul><li>Results: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Milk fat test increased from 3.6% to 3.9% within a week </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Milk protein test increased from 3.00% to 3.15% within a couple of weeks </li></ul></ul>
  44. 44. Make Sure Wagon Is Level: Triolet 3-Screw Parked In Loading Ramp
  45. 45. Triolet Triple-screw Wagon Over-loaded At Back of Wagon Loading un-level wagon with back of wagon lower than the front causes feed buildup in back of wagon
  46. 46. Influence of Loading An Un-level Triple-Screw Wagon On TMR Particle Size Distribution Along The Bunk Load 1 Load 2 Front Back Back Front Bottom and top screens of shaker box go up and middle screen goes down as TMR moves from front to back of the wagon
  47. 47. Influence of Loading An Un-level Triple-Screw Wagon On TMR Particle Size Distribution Along The Bunk
  48. 48. Un-level Triple-Screw Wagon During Loading Causes Variation In TMR Goal: < 5% CV for Middle and Bottom Screens
  49. 49. Proper Ingredient Mix Order
  50. 50. Improper Loading and Under Mixing of Liquid Supplements In TMRs <ul><li>Case 1 – Wagon not level and under mixing liquid supplement </li></ul><ul><li>Case 2 – Loading at improper position on wagon </li></ul><ul><li>Case 3 – Loading at improper position on wagon and influence on nutrient distribution in the TMR </li></ul>
  51. 51. Case 1. Mixer Not Level, Liquid Added Without Spray Bar and Mixed For Only 1 minute
  52. 52. Case 1.Influence of Not Properly Mixing Liquid Supplement On TMR Particle Size Along The Bunk Mixer truck was not level as the front of the truck was sloped down hill. TMR was mixed for only 1 minute or less after liquid was loaded. The TMR was extremely wet at the front of the load when it was dropped and dry at the end. Small feed particles on bottom pan stuck to larger particles in top and middle screens at the front of the load. The effect was consistent across all 4 loads.
  53. 53. Case 1. Influence of Not Properly Mixing Liquid Supplement On TMR Particle Size Variation Mixer truck was not level as the front of the truck was sloped down hill. TMR was mixed for only 1 minute or less after liquid was loaded. The TMR was extremely wet at the front of the load when it was dropped and dry at the end. Small feed particles on bottom pan stuck to larger particles in top and middle screens at the front of the load. The effect was consistent across all 4 loads.   Penn State Shaker Box Screens TMR Loads Top Middle Bottom Load Pens Situation Avg., % CV,% Avg., % CV,% Avg., % CV,% 1 Lactation Front of Load Wet 8.0 28.6 66.1 10.96 25.8 35.45 2 Lactation Front of Load Wet 6.7 27.3 65.9 13.59 27.4 37.95 3 Lactation Front of Load Wet 5.3 38.9 64.9 9.45 29.8 21.01 4 Lactation Front of Load Wet 7.6 25.9 62.5 14.34 29.8 23.46
  54. 54. Case 2. Liquid Supplement Loaded Improperly In a Twin-Screw Vertical Mixer Wagon and TMR Particle Size Oelberg. 2009. Solid Lines = Improperly loaded Dashed Lines = Properly loaded Beginning Ending
  55. 55. Case 3. Adding Liquid At End and At Center of the Wagon
  56. 56. Case 3. Improper Loading of Liquid Caused Variation In Moisture and Particle Size of TMR Along the Bunk Note: As moisture level increases from front to back of wagon, amount of TMR on top screen increases while amount on bottom decreases
  57. 57. Case 3. Improper Loading of Liquid Caused Variation In Moisture, Crude Protein and Ash (Mineral) Levels In The TMR Along the Bunk
  58. 58. Liquid Spray Bar 3” dia pvc, 4 to 6 feet long 1/2 “ dia holes 6 inches apart Cap ends and place holes in caps Two rows of holes positioned at 5 and 7 o’clock <ul><li>Recommendations for liquid supplements in TMRs: </li></ul><ul><li>Highly recommend to suspend small particles and to reduce sorting </li></ul><ul><li>Make sure wagon is level during mixing </li></ul><ul><li>Use spray and load liquid over the center of mixer between screws or augers </li></ul><ul><li>Add liquid to commodity pre-blend </li></ul><ul><li>Make pre-blend and TMRs on the same day reduce heating and spoilage </li></ul>
  59. 59. Adding Liquid With A Spray Bar
  60. 60. Outline <ul><li>What Is A TMR Audit </li></ul><ul><li>Factors that Contribute to TMR Variation </li></ul><ul><li>Managing Ingredient variation and shrink </li></ul><ul><li>Labor Efficiencies </li></ul><ul><li>Summary of Diamond V TMR Audit Data </li></ul>
  61. 61. Key Focus Areas for Managing Shrink and Nutrient Variation In Home Grown Ingredients
  62. 62. Silage Face Heating Source: Venne. 2007
  63. 63. Silage Temperature 6 hours after Facing 4:00 PM Source: Venne and Martel. 2008 No Facer Faced 12-18” Faced 24-36”
  64. 64. 43.3 44.4 45.7 40.7 41.0 41.8 36.0 36.3 37.8 43.3 43.6 43.7 41.6 42.9 43.0 36.4 37.7 37.9 Haylage NDF – Sampling and Laboratory Consistency Evaluation Stone. 2008
  65. 65. Avoid Digging Into The Face
  66. 66. Excellent Face on Haylage Pile
  67. 67. Facing Haylage Pile
  68. 68. Pushing and Lifting Alfalfa Haylage Into A Pile
  69. 69. Crude Protein Levels In Haylage Sampled From the Face <ul><li>Width of pile at base = 135’ </li></ul><ul><li>10 Samples taken from face </li></ul><ul><li>Values, % of Dry Matter </li></ul>23.8 24.5 20.0 23.0 20.1 19.4 19.4 23.7 24.1 17.4
  70. 70. Crude Protein Levels In Windrow After Haylage was Faced 23.0 22.4 21.4 18.9 19.3 18.3 18.4 20.1 23.1 21.1 <ul><li>10 equally spaced samples taken from windrow starting </li></ul><ul><li>10 feet from the edges of the pile </li></ul><ul><li>Windrow was 135’ long </li></ul><ul><li>Fresh haylage was avoided in sampling </li></ul><ul><li>Values, % of Dry Matter </li></ul>
  71. 71. Crude Protein Levels In Haylage Pile 21.9 19.4 22.0 21.6 21.9 19.8 20.1 19.4 21.4 20.3 <ul><li>Samples 4, 5 and 6 taken 3’ under surface </li></ul><ul><li>All other samples taken at surface </li></ul><ul><li>Values, % of dry matter </li></ul>
  72. 73. Silage Face Management Summary <ul><li>Cut back plastic and place extra tires on leading edge </li></ul><ul><li>Remove spoiled silage as needed </li></ul><ul><li>Make silage face smooth and vertical </li></ul><ul><li>Blend faced silage into a pile to minimize variation in the silage and in the TMRs </li></ul><ul><li>No loose silage at end of feeding </li></ul>
  73. 74. Outline <ul><li>Factors that Contribute to TMR Variation </li></ul><ul><li>Silage Facing Trial </li></ul><ul><li>Labor Efficiencies </li></ul><ul><li>Summary of Diamond V TMR Audits </li></ul>
  74. 75. Opportunity for Improved Efficiencies?
  75. 76. Reduced Mixing Time in Half Super Mix
  76. 77. Labor Efficiencies <ul><li>Are the feeding facilities laid out to maximize quality & efficiency? </li></ul><ul><li>Have we observed our feeders mix? </li></ul><ul><li>Do We Communicate with our Feeders? </li></ul>
  77. 78. Outline <ul><li>Factors that Contribute to TMR Variation </li></ul><ul><li>Silage Facing Trial </li></ul><ul><li>Reading Bunks </li></ul><ul><li>Labor Efficiencies </li></ul><ul><li>Summary of Diamond V TMR Audits </li></ul>
  78. 79. States Where TMR Audits On Lactation Rations Have Been Done TMR audits from CA and MI have not been included
  79. 80. Types of TMR Mixer Wagons Tested During TMR Audits HA = horizontal 4-auger HP = horizontal paddle HR = horizontal auger-reel V1 = single auger vertical V2 = twin auger vertical V3 = triple auger vertical Number of TMR loads tested: 514
  80. 81. Top 10 Brands of TMR Mixers Indentified in TMR Audit Summary Number of TMR loads tested: 514
  81. 82. Types of TMR Rations Tested In 514 Loads
  82. 83. Repeated TMR Audits Show Improved Consistency Over Time Data represents 75 out of 514 loads
  83. 86. Top 25% of TMRs have coefficients of variation of 3% or less Goal: 3% CV or less in middle and bottom screens of Penn State Shaker box
  84. 87. Coefficient of Variation Levels for TMR Consistency <ul><li></= 3% </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Top 25% of TMRs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>TMR mixing basics followed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>excellent - mostly corn silage, haylage and/or chopped hay: easy to mix, new and well-maintained mixers </li></ul></ul><ul><li></= 4% </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Top 50% of TMRs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Not sure cow performance is different from 3% CV </li></ul></ul><ul><li>>4%   </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Antidotal evidence has show 1 to 3 lbs inc. in milk and improved milk fat% after corrections are made </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Poor TMR Mixing Basics </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Not mixing long enough after last ingredient </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Overfilling </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Worn augers and kicker plates </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Hay not processed </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Ingredient mix order not optimized </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Liquid not loaded in proper position </li></ul></ul></ul>
  85. 88. Summary of What We Covered <ul><li>What Is A TMR Audit </li></ul><ul><li>Factors that Contribute to TMR Variation </li></ul><ul><li>Silage Facing Trial </li></ul><ul><li>Labor Efficiencies </li></ul><ul><li>Summary of Diamond V TMR Data </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Best mixer is one that is well maintained and managed by following TMR mixing basics </li></ul></ul>

×