Feed Manufacturing to Optimize Pig Performance

Transcription

1 Feed Manufacturing to Optimize Pig Performance Kansas State University Applied Swine Nutrition Team Presentation Outline Nutrition 101 How to Effectively Blame the Feed Mill Vet Med 101 How to Effectively Blame the Nutritionist 1

2 Receiving Cost Center Best (Only) place to manage variability of ingredients and to prevent accepting of low quality ingredients Receiving cost center Visually inspect ingredients Sample all incoming ingredients Test for quality before unloading Broken, damaged kernels, molds. Test weight, crude protein Segregate if possible Place product in correct location Right bin Rotate stock Receiving Cost Center I accidentally put a truck load of salt into the dical bin. 2

3 METHODS OF GRINDING Hammermill Impact Attrition Roller Mill Shear Compression Hammermill Grinding Inlet Hammers Screen Disk Plate Hammermill Grinding Impact Attrition 3

4 Factors Affecting Hammermill Performance Feeder Tip Speed Screen Area Hammer Pattern Hammer Position Air Assist System Screen Area Incorrect screen hole stagger can lead to wear between Broken the holes at 28/06/02: and premature screen 11.00failure Thicker screens = increase life = reduced throughput More holes = reduced life = greater throughput Air Assist System Air required is 1 ½ - 2 cfm of air per square inch of hammermill screen area. Air assist forms negative pressure inside hammermill. 4

5 Hammermill Grinding Vertical shaft hammermill Roller Mill Grinding Inlet Rolls 2-high 3-high Roller Mill Grinding Conditions to Avoid Top rolls too close Material accumulating in the nip of the top rolls Bottom rolls too far open Work not evenly divided between top and bottom 5

6 Roller Mill Grinding Normal Operation Top pair open slightly, feeding evenly from end to end Material passing directly through the nip of the top pair Bottom pair "completing" the grind Work evenly divided between and bottom rolls Roller Mill Grinding Corrugations Patterns Cracking Corn Corn ( > 700 µ) Corn ( < 600 µ) Top Middle Bottom Small grains ( > 700 µ) Set-up depends on material, which varies Grinding Cost Center Roller Mill 6

7 Hammermill Grinding Summary Advantages Ability to grind a wide variety of materials Ease of maintenance, less maintenance cost (quick change hammers) Versatility Less complicated to operate (automation) Less initial cost Disadvantages Energy consumption (Attrition) Produces a greater Sgw (flowability vs. nutrition) Noise and dust pollution Heat generation and moisture loss (shrink) Poorer flow ability Roller Mill Summary Advantages Electrical efficiency (shear) Less maintenance ( difficulty, cost) Less dust pollution Higher initial cost Lower Sgw (less variation in particle size) Better flow ability Disadvantages When maintenance is needed, it is expensive Can not effectively grind fibrous materials Reduced throughput at small particle sizes Grinding Cost Center 7

8 How Do We Define Particle Size? Ro-Tap How Do We Define Particle Size? The Use of Different Procedures Three screen test (info at Sampling Frequency In house At least weekly 400 ton Send to outside lab monthly Flow agent Ideal sample in jar for constant comparison Log of results accountability 24 8

9 How Do We Define Particle Size? The Effects of Flow Agents 80 microns Effects of particle size on feed efficiency % per 100 microns 1.0% per 100 microns F/G Cabrera, 1994a Cabrera, 1994b Wondra, Particle size, microns Paulk, 2011 DeJong, Particle size, microns Every 100 microns = 1. F/G improves by ~1.2% 2. 7 lb less feed/finishing pig 3. Current $0.70 to 0.80/pig savings in feed cost 9

10 Particle Size Effects on Diet Flowability Flowability 0% added fat, hammer-milled 3% added fat, hammer-milled 6% added fat, hammer-milled 0% added fat, roller-milled 3% added fat, roller-milled 6% added fat, roller-milled Goodband et al., 2006 Feed Flow The finer you grind corn the poorer it flows Hammer mill corn flows worse than roller mill corn The standard deviation of ground corn micron should be below 2.1 with no flow agent With flow agent an acceptable standard deviation is 2.7 or less 29 Feed Flow Cont. Power Scalper and 3 high roller mill can achieve STD DEV hard to visualize, less than 10% on or above the #16 screen and no more than 20% on or below the #100 screen with a flow agent Elevated moisture in any ingredient diminishes feed flow Fat addition does not improve feed flow 30 10

11 ADG, kg Effect of particle size and diet form on nursery pig performance (d 0 to 21; 11 to 22 kg) Diet form corn µ P < 0.07 Diet form P < SEM = Meal Pellet micron corn 320 micron corn 360 micron diet Particle size and portion ground De Jong et al., 2013 Effect of particle size and diet form on nursery pig performance (d 0 to 21; BW 11 to 22 kg) Diet form corn µ P < 0.38 Diet form P < 0.01 SEM = 0.01 Meal Pellet F/G micron corn 320 micron corn 360 micron diet Particle size and portion ground De Jong et al., 2013 ADG, kg Effects of corn particle size, complete diet grinding, and diet form on finishing pig ADG, Exp Grind x form, P < vs 650 µ, P < 0.15 Grind, P = 0.89; Form, P < SEM = Meal Pellet micron corn 320 micron corn 360 micron diet Particle size and portion ground 11

12 Effects of corn particle size, complete diet grinding, and diet form on finishing pig F/G, Exp. 1 F/G Grind x form P = vs 650 microns P < Grind P = 0.52; Form P < SEM = Meal 2.74 Pellet micron corn 320 micron corn 360 micron diet Particle size and portion ground De Jong et al., 2012 Holyoke, CO Feedmill F/G Particle size First Close-outs from new mill P01 P03 P05 P07 P09 P11 P01 P03 P05 P07 P09 P11 P01 P03 P05 P07 P09 P11 P01 P03 P05 P07 P09 P11 P01 P03 P Get the most out of what you re buying Particle Size is king 350 micron target sub 400 micron required for pelleted diets Hammermills preferred due to: Low particle size potential Low maintenance/operational cost High throughput at target micron size 36 Source: Seaboard Foods 12

13 Particle size and F/G trend line Micron Feed:Gain YTD Source: Seaboard Foods Fine grinding Does it Pay? Feed/Gain Finishing tons manufactured 1,081,665 Additional Tons Required using 2008 F/G 115,892 Additional Cost of Ingredients (2.79 FC vs FC) $29,883,911 Incremental Milling/Delivery $8/ton $927,136 Savings of 27 points F/G $30,811,047 Simple Breakeven $28.48 per ton $8.54 per head Source: Seaboard Foods Get the most out of what you re buying Don t forget sow feed savings Seaboard data has shown similar savings in gestation as finishing Meal to pellets to low particle size with less than 1% impact on mortality Allows either less feed usage or less nutrient dense formulation Rule of thumb 1.2% per 100 microns?? micron reduction 9.67% improved F/G 2.8% per 100 microns Were likely higher than 700 microns in 2008 Includes change to pelleting in Colorado mill 39 Source: Seaboard Foods 13

14 Conclusions Particle size Reducing particle size of grain improves F/G For grow finish pigs Benefit is linear to at least 300 microns in meal diets Does not appear to be as beneficial to grind below 600 microns in high quality pellets (smaller particle size improves pellet quality!) For nursery pigs: No benefit in F/G to grind corn below 600 microns Feed intake and gain are typically reduced when corn or wheat is ground to 300 microns in meal diets Conclusions Complete diet grinding Complete diet grinding Does not appear to improve performance in high fiber diets that we have tested (DDGS, wheat middlings) Reduces intake in meal diets Must gain enough benefit in pellet quality to justify cost Batching Cost Center 14

15 Vitamin losses per month in storage Vitamin and form No choline w/choline Base Mix Pellet +Extruded A beadlet, cross linked A beadlet, non cross linked D 3 beadlet (A/D 3 ) E acetate 50% E alcohol, natural MSBC MNB MPB Riboflavin Pyridoxine B Calcium Pantothenate Folic Acid Biotin Niacin Choline Batching Cost Center Mixing Cost Center Liquid Manifold Mixer Inter-vent Surge Bin 15

16 Mixer Purpose Distribute ingredients and nutrients throughout entire batch Measurement 10 evenly spaced sequential samples Single nutrient Zinc Results Coefficient of variation Std deviation/mean Goal 10 % 15% likely adequate for grow-finish 46 Mixer Purpose Distribute ingredients and nutrients throughout entire batch Cubic feet NOT tons Over filling Ribbons exposed Sequencing Corn or soybean meal 1 st Liquid amino acids Work with your suppliers 47 VERTICAL MIXER Advantages Low initial investment Low maintenance cost Small footprint Can be installed on a scale Disadvantages Long mixing time Poor clean out Low inclusion of liquids 16

17 RIBBION MIXERS FEED FLOW Main Mixing Zone Short mixing time Good mixing action Good clean out Main Mixing Zone FEED FLOW Testing mixers Mixer efficiency test 10 equally spaced samples obtained from mixer or during discharge Analyzed for same nutrient Coefficient of variation used to estimate adequacy of mixing CV of less than 10% has been goal Marker comparison for mixer efficiency test (Clark, 2006) Mix Time (min) Item,% DL-Methionine Lysine-HCl Crude Protein Chloride Ion (as sodium chloride) Phosphorus Manganese Microtracer TM Red #40 (count) Microtracer TM Red #40 (absorbance) Microtracer TM RF-Blue Lake Roxarsone (3-Nitro ) Semduramicin (Aviax )

18 Impact of Mixing Time on Range of Crude Protein Content 22% Groesbeck et al., 2007 Adequate Mixing Improves 0.7 Gain 1.8 Feed Efficiency ADG, lb 0.5 Linear P < Quadratic P < 0.10 SE = F/G Linear P < 0.09 Quadratic P < 0.06 SE = CV, Mixer Phase CV, Mixer Phase 1 53 Groesbeck, C.N., R.D. Goodband, M.D. Tokach, S.S. Dritz, J.L. Nelssen, J.M. DeRouchey, and C.R. Neill Diet mixing time affects nursery pig performance. J. Anim. Sci. 85: Diet Uniformity Effects on Finishing Pigs 1100 No trt effect (P > 0.15) ADG, g No trt effect (P > 0.15) CV, % (salt in finishing diets) Traylor et al Gain:Feed, g/kg CV, % (salt in finishing diets) 18

19 Example of Mixer Test Check Annually 42 CV before audit (Increased mixing 4 min. to 7 min.) Mixer Test Locations Sample mixer Sample surge Mixer or Surge samples provides information on dead spots in the mixer or mixer maintenance issues Sampling during the discharge process provides representative samples of the feed as it moves through the system. Sample discharge conveyor 57 Pelleting 19

20 Pan Coverage Poor Quality Pellets Narrow adjustment with poor quality pellets Phase 1, averaged 49% coverage Phase 3, averaged 93% coverage Wide adjustment with poor quality pellets Phase 1, averaged 96% coverage Phase 3, averaged 99% coverage Effects of feeder adjustment and pellet quality on finisher ADG 1.1 Feeder opening, cm Diet form P = 0.08 ADG, kg Meal Pellets Pellets with 50% fines Nemecheck et al Effects of feeder adjustment and pellet quality on F/G F/G Feeder opening, cm Diet form P < 0.001; Feeder adjust. P < Meal Pellets Pellets with 50% fines Nemecheck et al

21 Pellet Quality Affects F/G F/G Meal 90% Pellets 70% Pellets 50% Pellets 30% Pellets Pollmann, 2011 Pelleting Cost Center ADG, kg Effect of fiber level and diet form on finishing pig performance (d 0 to 81; BW 50 to 130 kg) Interaction P =.83 Pellet P = 0.03 Diet P = 0.35 Meal Pellet 0.99 SEM = d 0 to 64: Corn soy High fiber High fiber Low Low High d 64 to 81: Corn soy Corn soy High fiber Nemechek et al.,

22 F/G Effect of fiber level and diet form on finishing pig performance (d 0 to 81; BW 50 to 130 kg) Interaction P = 0.19 Pellet P = Diet P = SEM = Meal 2.94 Pellet d 0 to 64: Corn soy High fiber High fiber Corn soy 30% DDGS 30% DDGS d 64 to 81: Corn soy Corn soy High fiber Nemechek et al., 2012 Effect of fiber level and diet form on finishing pig belly fat iodine value (d 81; BW 130 kg) Iodine value, mg/g Interaction P = Pellet P < Diet P < SEM = Meal 75.5 Pellet d 0 to 64: Corn soy High fiber High fiber Corn soy 30% DDGS 30% DDGS d 64 to 81: Corn soy Corn soy High fiber Nemechek et al., 2012 Survival Rate by genotype biggest risk 100 Meal Pellets Survival Rate PIC 380 PIC 280 PIC

23 To Pellet or Not What About Mortality? ADG % Improvement F/G % Improvement Death Loss Mash Death Loss Pellets More mortality in field than at research farm Death Loss Mash Death Loss Pellet Research Field Cull Story 67 Pelleting the bottom line If your genetics can withstand low particle size and pelleting, future ingredient prices will support capital investment for pelleting If your genetics will not withstand low particle size and pelleting 68 Source: Seaboard Foods Conclusions Pelleting Pelleting Improves ADG and F/G Response depends on particle size Greater F/G response at higher particle sizes Response depends on diet formulation Greater response in higher byproduct diets Response depends on pellet quality Linear response to improving pellet quality Negatively impacts fat quality Economic analysis must include the potential increase in mortality with pellets 23

24 Influence of manufacturing costs per ton on cost per pig $/pig Tandem bins: One of best ways to minimize delivery cost Good Practices Only put feed into an empty bin Not on top of feed Better flow with the augers running fewer times per day but longer each time Use less electricity too Adjust the delay on the feedline proximity switch Poly bins could be a positive Remove at least one of the restrictor plates 72 24

25 Iowa State/Iowa Select Farms 73 Batching Accuracy Mill production records Actual vs. expected Scale inspections Calibration of liquid meters 74 Spot Check Batching Scales Batching weight vs. truck weight Weigh on a separate recently inspected scale 75 25

26 Limestone & Phosphate Challenge Today s diets are different Lower inclusion Costly overages 76 Accounting Ending ingredient inventory should equal Beginning ingredient inventory plus the ingredients received minus usages Has value in verifying Scale accuracy Absence of use Has value of interpreting complete feed analysis 77 Sampling Non representative sample Misleading results We usually send the lab 400 grams Only 1-5 grams actually analyzed 78 26

27 Dividing the Sample 79 Barn Samples Take from each quartile of barn Sample bag over drop tube 80 Finished Feeds Not composite sample Individual samples of target diet More samples of fewer diets rather than fewer samples of every diet Protein Ca P Na Fat Seek to understand with help from Batching data Inventory controls 81 27

28 Sampling Concern Carry over feed in bin Paylean Resolution Mill Load out Feed truck 82 Mycotoxin Testing Change intensity With season With concern 83 Take Home Points Communicate proactively Representative Sampling Grind Proper mixing Accurate batching Accounting is your friend Variable ingredients need the most attention Finished feed is a reflector of all the above 84 28

29 Thank You! KSUswine.org 29