Mechanical conditioning of forage can be accomplished by passing the crop through fluted intermeshing rolls
or by passing the crop over the tines of an impeller rotor. Three impeller conditioners and one intermeshing roll
conditioner were compared in field experiments. The impeller conditioners differed on the type of tine used on the rotor.
Hood position and impeller speed were the two adjustments made on all impeller conditioners. The linear load on the
rolls was the only adjustment made on the intermeshing roll conditioner. The effect of the conditioning mechanisms and
their adjustments on drying rate and leaf loss in alfalfa and grass crops was measured. Comparisons were made
exclusively among impeller conditioners using all adjustment combinations and among all machines with specific
aggressive and nonaggressive adjustments selected. In alfalfa, among impeller conditioners exclusively, the fast rotor
speed caused about 7.3% leaf loss, which was 1.1 percentage point greater than the leaf loss caused by the slow rotor
speed. With respect to hood position, the maximum average leaf loss was 6.77% and varied by less than 0.1 percentage
point. Incidentally, in the first day of drying, alfalfa conditioned with the fast impeller speed exhibited a 3% greater
drying rate constant than the drying rate constant of alfalfa conditioned with the slow impeller speed. In the first day of
drying, grass conditioned with the fast impeller speed exhibited a 13% greater drying rate than the drying rate of grass
conditioned with the slow impeller speed. In addition, drying rates in alfalfa varied less than 8% and drying rates in grass
varied less than 10% in the first day of drying with respect to hood position. When comparisons were made exclusively
among impeller conditioners, statistically significant differences in drying rate and leaf loss were only exhibited between
the fast and slow impeller speeds. In the first day of drying, forage (both grass and alfalfa) conditioned by aggressively-set
impeller machines exhibited drying rates 23 to 63% greater than drying rates of forage conditioned by the
aggressively-set intermeshing roll conditioner. Also in the first day of drying, forage (both grass and alfalfa) conditioned
by nonaggressively-set impeller machines exhibited drying rates 49 to 60% greater than the drying rates of forage
conditioned by the nonaggressively-set intermeshing roll conditioner. Results also suggest that aggressively-set impeller
machines, caused 1.7 to 3.4 percentage points more leaf loss than the aggressively-set intermeshing roll machine, and
nonaggressively-set impeller machines caused 1.2 to 2.2 percentage points more leaf loss than the nonaggressively-set
intermeshing roll machine.
[1]
R. G. Koegel,et al.
Quantification of Mechanical Losses in Forage Harvesting
,
1985
.
[2]
C. A. Rotz,et al.
Drying Rates, Losses and Fuel Requirements for Mowing and Conditioning Alfalfa
,
1984
.
[3]
P. Savoie,et al.
Loss and Drying Characteristics of Forage Mats After Rainfall
,
1993
.
[4]
C. A. Rotz,et al.
Hay Harvesting System Losses and Drying Rates
,
1982
.
[5]
R. J. Straub,et al.
Evaluation of Roll Design in Hay Conditioning
,
1975
.
[6]
C. Rotz,et al.
Changes in Forage Quality During Harvest and Storage
,
2015
.
[7]
C. Alan Rotz,et al.
Alfalfa Drying Model for the Field Environment
,
1985
.
[8]
D.V.H. Rees,et al.
A discussion of sources of dry matter loss during the process of haymaking
,
1982
.
[9]
R. G. Koegel,et al.
Leaf Loss and Drying Rate of Alfalfa as Affected by Conditioning Roll Type
,
1991
.
[10]
H. D. Bruhn,et al.
Effect of Mechanical Forage-Harvesting Devices on Field-Curing Rates and Relative Harvesting Losses
,
1970
.
[11]
R. E. Hellwig,et al.
A Tandem Roll Mower-Conditioner
,
1977
.