Heat Stress Lessons Learned and Reducing the Impact
57
Heat Stress Lessons Learned and Reducing the Impact 134 Call Hall Manhattan, KS 66560- 1600 785-532-1207 [email protected] Dr. Micheal Brouk OABP Spring Meeting April 13 & 14, 2011 Guelph, Ontario
description
Heat Stress Lessons Learned and Reducing the Impact. 134 Call Hall Manhattan, KS 66560-1600 785-532-1207 [email protected]. Dr. Micheal Brouk. OABP Spring Meeting April 13 & 14, 2011 Guelph, Ontario. Background and Experience. Family farm in Missouri - Crop production - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Transcript of Heat Stress Lessons Learned and Reducing the Impact
Heat StressLessons Learned and Reducing the
Impact
134 Call HallManhattan, KS 66560-1600
Dr. Micheal Brouk
OABP Spring MeetingApril 13 & 14, 2011 Guelph, Ontario
Background and Experience Family farm in Missouri - Crop production
20 years service to feed industry and university Currently Associate Professor & Extension Dairy
Specialist General nutritionist – KSU Dairy
28.901 lb/cow rolling herd milk production989 lb/fat per cow861 lb/protein per cow
15 to 20 pound drop each summer !!!! How long does it last?
Average Daily MilkNY Holstein Herds
Effective Temperature Air Temperature Relative Humidity Air Movement Solar Radiation
Buffington, 1983
Heat Stress Reduce Feed Intake Increased Water Intake Increased Respiration Rate Increased Evaporated Water Loss Increased Body Temperature Changes in Metabolic Rate & HormonesReduced Milk and ReproductionArmstrong & Welchert, 1994
Methods to Reduce Heat Stress
Shade Fans Misting Evaporative Zone Air conditioning
2 pm4 pmnoon
Sun Angles for E-W Freestall - August 21st
North South
40 Degrees North Latitude (Omaha - Springfield)
4/12 Roof Slope
NOTE: Sidewall is 14'with a 13'9" openingdue to 2' overhang
8 am & 4 pmnoon
10 am & 2 pm
6'
54'33'
1 pm2 pm
3 pm4 pm
5 pm6 pm
1 pm2 pm
3 pm
6 am7 am
8 am9 am
11 am10 am
Sun Angles for N-S Freestall - August 21st
East West
40 Degrees North Latitude (Omaha - Springfield)
4/12 Roof Slope
NOTE: Sidewall is 14'with a 13'9" openingdue to 2' overhang
noon11 am
10 am
Cost Vs. Quality
If you can see your shadow, spend more money!!!
Absorption of Solar Radiation
5450 BTU/Hr 84 oF & 21% Humidity THI = 73
(Armstrong and Hillman, 1998)
Shade Design Orientation
North-SouthAllows shade to travel
38 - 50 ft2/cow) 11.5 - 14.5 ft tall Material
Cost Vs Shade QualityUseful Life
Where to Shade? Holding Pen Resting Area Feed Area Order is important!!!!!!
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Chamber Temperature, °F
Heat
Diss
ipat
ion,
%
Nonevaporative Cooling
Evaporative Cooling Respiratory Tract
Evaporative Cooling
Outer Body Surface
Effect of Sprinkling Frequency and Supplemental Air Movement on Respiration
Rate
5 15 25 35 45 55 65 75 85 954050
60
7080
90
100110
00 + F1515 + F1010 + F55 + F
Minutes from Start of Observation
Bre
aths
/min
KSU Cow Comfort Consortium 2001 (Brouk, M.J., J.F. Smith and J.P. Harner, III)
Effect of Sprinkling Frequency and Fan Cooling on Udder Skin
Temperature
93
95
97
99
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 195 minute periods
Udd
er sk
in te
mpe
ratu
re 00 + F55 + F1010 + F 1515 + F
KSU Cow Comfort Consortium 2001 (Brouk, M.J., J.F. Smith and J.P. Harner, III)
Message for conventional barns
Cooling is a combination of Soaking cycles
Temperature Dependent– Increased Frequency of soaking with increased
temperature
Increased air movement
Holding Pen Factors Duration
2x (1hr) 3x (.75 hr) 4x (.5 hr) Density Increase in Heat Load
Rapid increase in body temperatureCooling effective
Decreased Body Temperature 3 oF Increased Milk 1.75 lb/c/d(Wiersma & Armstrong, 1983)
Holding Pen Cooling Fans1000 ft3/min/cow30-36 inch =10,000 - 12,000 cfm)1 per 10 cows or 150 ft2
SpacingHolding Pen Width <24 ft
Sidewalls 6-8 ftHolding Pen Width >24 ft
Perpendicular to cows 6-8 ft Rows 20 ft (36 in) or 40 ft (48 in)
Harner, 1999
Sprinklers Wet the Cow Dry the Cow Prevent Excess Water Design
0.03 gal/ft2
8 x 8 ft grid Water Hose
Harner, 1999
2000 Study
36” Fan over stalls & feedline
36” Fan over feedline
Average Milk Production
787980818283848586
MILK (LB/C/D) Feedline
Stall + Feed
Feedline 79.75Stall + Feed 85.6
P<.01
Economic Analysis of Cooling Systems
Four-Row BarnF F + S
Additional Feed Cost, $/pen 1,398 2,516
Gross Income, $/pen 6,730 12,114Total Annual Expense, $/pen 3,074 5,420
Net Return, $/pen 3,656 6,693
Missed Opportunity = Lower Production!!!
Last 5 pounds of milk most profitable!!!!!!
Quick TeeJet® Nozzle Body, Check Valve and Cap
Turbo FloodJet® Nozzle – TF-VP5 ($1.50)
Quick TeeJet Cap and Gasket 25600-1-NYR ($0.60)
Nozzle Body and Check Valve QJ8360-NYB ($3.54)
Total Cost $5.64
Cooling the Air
Evaporative Cooling Effective in Arid Conditions Evaporate Water in Air
Decrease TemperatureIncrease HumidityEvaporation Rate Function of Temperature
and Humidity
40
Evaporative Cooling
41
Cellulose Evaporative PadWATER
AIR
Potential THI Change Due to Water Evaporation in a
Low Relative Humidity Environment
05
101520253035404550
THI Change
10 20 30 40% Relative Humidity
115110105100959085807570
KSU Cow Comfort Consortium 2001 (Brouk, M.J., J.F. Smith and J.P. Harner, III)
Potential THI Change Due to Water Evaporation in a
High Relative Humidity Environment
02468
101214161820
THI Change
50 60 70 80% Relative Humidity
115110105100959085807570
KSU Cow Comfort Consortium 2001 (Brouk, M.J., J.F. Smith and J.P. Harner, III)
44
Low Profile Cross Ventilation
45
30'-8"
300 to 350' for conventional natural ventilated freestalls
220' for low profile cross ventilated freestalls
17'-1"
Natural ventilated freestalls - 4/12 roof slope
Cross ventilated freestalls - 0.5/12 roof slope
100'
8-Row Low Profile Cross Ventilated Freestall Building
4-Row Conventional Freestall Building
100 to 150' between buildings
Structural support posts of roof not shown
FeedDrive
FeedDrive Alley
Feed CowAlley
FeedAlley
CowAlley
CowAlley
CowAlley
FeedAlley
FeedAlley
210'
13'
10' Evaporative PadBaffle (Bottom 8 ft above alley)
Airflow Airflow AirflowAirflowAirflow
Fans
Roof Slope - 0.5/12
18'
Low Profile Cross Ventilation
46
Two 5 foot evaporative pads –
10 ft wide x 360 ft long
Winter inlet – parlor transfer lane
Air inlet with an evaporative pad
47
Average Temperature – LPCVJuly 17 to August 16, 2007
68
72
76
80
84
88
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21
Time of Day
Tem
pera
ture
(o F)
Ambient
Baffle - Pad
Baffle - Fan
48
Water Usage Per Cow Per Day
24 hr Fence Line Soaker 8’ nozzle spacing, 120 cycles per day (1 on – 11 off)
0.5 gpm – 15 gal/dy/cow1.0 gpm - 30 gal/dy/cow
16 hr Evaporative Pad 0.33 gal/hr / sq ft pad area
4.5 sf/cow – 24 gal/dy/cow (8 row )2.75 sf/cow - 15 gal/dy/cow (16 row )
Advantages of Cross Ventilation
Increased cow density Control of cow environment Improved feed efficiency Ease of construction Improved efficiency of water use
Disadvantage of Cross-ventilation
Energy usage Maintenance – Pads and Fans Lighting
Day/night patterns Issues with door damage Summertime vs Winter Ventilation
Cow vs people
Pad MaintenanceMaintain Air Flow
Cleaning
Replacement
Gravel Floor
Evaporative Pad
Existing Wall
6'
FenceOrganic Bedding
Impact of Evaporative Pad on Temperature
KSU Maternity Barn (07/25 to 08/31/07)
70
75
80
85
90
95
0 4 8 12 16 20
Time of Day (hour)
Tem
pera
ture
(F)
Ambient Evaporative PadHourly averages based on 432 data points
Impact of Evaporative Pad on THI KSU Maternity Barn (07/25 to 08/31/07)
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
0 4 8 12 16 20
Hour
THI
Ambient Evaporative Pad
Hourly averages based on 432 data points
Impact of Evaporative Pads on Vaginal Temperatures of Close-up
Cows
100.5
101
101.5
102
102.5
103
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Hour
Tem
pera
ture
re
Pads Off Pads On
Summary Cow Comfort and Heat Stress Affects
Cow Intake Milk Production Reproduction Profit
Key Issues Heat Accumulation Periods of Heat Exchange Working with what you have React to the response of the cow
