Modeling and Optimization of the Grinding Cereals to Produce Poultry Feed in the Hammer Mill using Response Surface Method (RSM)

ماشین های کشاورزی

Article 6, Volume 10, Issue 2 - Serial Number 20, 2020, Pages 187-200   

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: 10.22067/jam.v10i2.72568

Authors

Z. Zibahoosh; J. Khodaei^* ; S. Zareei

Department of Biosystems Engineering, University of Kurdistan, Sanandaj, Iran

Abstract

Introduction
The most costly part of poultry breeding is feeding. Due to the noticeable developments in animal husbandry and agricultural sectors, it is necessary to use the mechanized methods to reduce the casualties, increase the productivity as well as reduce the time and cost in each of these sectors. Reducing the particle size is one of the ways to process cereals which improves the mixing and also the nutritional value of the feed and the quality of the pellet feed. Optimizing the performance of hammer mill with the aim of reducing the size of different materials for poultry feed, would be very beneficial for obtaining the minimum cost of food, maximum quality and capacity. The main objective of this research was to optimize the operational variables, including sieve size, grain moisture content, feed rate and the number of hammers, each of them at three levels, on a hammer mill during the process of poultry food production from wheat, corn, barley and soybean grains.
Materials and Methods
The seeds used in experiments were wheat (Azar2 variety), corn (Brazilian variety), soybean (Danpars variety) and barley (Aras variety). A laboratory hammer mill was used to perform experiments. The treatments including sieve diameter (2, 2.3and 4.4 mm), grain moisture content (10, 14 and 18%), seed input rate to milling compartments (one-third, two-thirds and fully openness of tank gate) and the number of hammer (12, 18 and 24) were investigated. In order to measure the working capacity of the hammer mill, the required time for milling was recorded. The amount of final milled crop in each experiment was weighed and divided into the needed time for milling. Sieve analysis was used to determine the distribution and dispersion of the milled material which works according to the standard of ASTM E-11-70 Part 41 (Anonymous, 2004). In this study, the effects of input variables were investigated using the response surface method focusing on the central composite design approach to optimize the fineness degree and working capacity of the mill. The Design Expert 8.0.6 software was applied for statistical analysis, modeling and optimization.
Results and Discussion
The results indicated that sieve size and the number of hammers have been affected by the fineness degree of wheat grains, significantly. In addition, all four factors and interaction effects between sieve size and moisture content and also moisture content and number of hammers influential working capacity at the significant level of 1%. In the case of corn, the influence of moisture content and its interaction with sieve size on grain fineness, and the effect of sieve size, moisture content, feed rate and interactions between sieve size and moisture content and moisture content and feed rate of working capacity were significant at the level of 1%. For barley, moisture content at the level of 1% and interaction between sieve size and moisture content at the probability level of 5% were effective on barley fineness degree. Meanwhile, the moisture content at the level of 1% and sieve size and its interaction with moisture content at the level of 5% influenced working capacity, significantly. Soybeans were not able to respond the required moisture level for the experiments due to their soft and brittle texture, whereas unreliable results were obtained by changing its moisture levels. The best size of sieve holes, grain moisture content, feed rate and the number of hammers were determined to minimize the fineness degree and maximize the working capacity of the hammer mill.
Conclusion
In this research, the response surface method considering a central composite design was used to optimize the operational variables of a hammer mill, including sieve hole size, grain moisture, feed rate and the number of hammer to produce poultry feed with the aim of achieving a minimum fineness degree (more grain crushing) and maximum milling capacity. The results of variance analysis were presented for wheat, corn, barley and soybean. Regression models could represent the relationship between the independent variables and the outputs with high confidence coefficient, and the best values of input variables were determined to optimize grinding operation.

Keywords

Fineness; hammer mill; milling; Optimization; work capacity

References

1. Adapa, P. H., L. Tabil, and G. Schoenau. 2010. Physical and frictional properties of non-treated and steam exploded barley, canola, oat and wheat straw grinds. Powder Technology 201: 230-241.

2. Al-Rabadi, G. J. 2013. The effect of hammer mill screen size on processing parameters and starch enrichment in milled barley. Jordan Journal of Agricultural Sciences 2: 162-169.

3. Anonymous. 2004. ASTM E-11-70, US-American Standard Specification (sieve No.).

4. Aslan, N. 2007. Application of response surface methodology and central composite rotatable design for modeling the influence of some operating variables of a multi-gravity separator for chromite concentration. Powder Technology 86: 769-776.

5. Badwaik, L. S., K. Prasad, and S. C. Deka. 2012. Optimization of extraction conditions by response surface methodology for preparing partially defatted peanut. International Food Research Journal 19 (1): 341-346.

6. Bitra, V. S. P., A. R.Womac, N. Chevanan, P. I. Miu, C. Igathinathane, S. Sokhansanj, and D. R. Smith. 2009a. Mathematical model parameters for describing the particle size spectra of knife-milled corn stover. Biosystem Engineering 104 (3): 369-383.

7. Bitra, V. S. P., A. R.Womac, N. Chevanan, P. I. Miu, C. Igathinathane, S. Sokhansanj, and D. R. Smith. 2009b. Direct mechanical energy measures of hammer mill comminution of switchgrass, wheat straw, and corn stover and analysis of their particle size distributions. Powder Technology 193: 32-45.

8. Dabbour, M. I., A. Bahnasawy, S. Ali, and Z. El-Haddad. 2015. Grinding parameters and their effects on the quality of corn for feed processing. Food Processing and Technology 6 (9): 1-7.

9. El Shal, M. S., M. A. Tawfik, A. M. El Shal, and K. A. Metwally. 2010. Study the effect of some operational factors on hammer mill. Farm Machinery and Power 27 (1): 54-74.

10. Endoh, H. 1993. Estimation of motor power output for crushing by screen hammer mills. Powder Technology 40: 71-77.

11. Ghasemi, Y., M. H. Kianmehr, and B. Azadegan. 2015. Effect of compost fertilizer granulation parameters using response surface method. Journal of Agricultural Machinery 5 (1): 191-198. (In Farsi).

12. Ghorbani, Z., A. A. Masoumi, and A. Hemmat. 2010. Specific energy consumption for reducing the size of alfalfa chops using a hammer mill. Biosystems Engineering 105: 34-40.

13. Giri, S. K., and S. Prasad. 2007. Drying kinetics and rehydration characteristics of microwave-vacuum and convective hot-air dried mushrooms. Journal of Food Engineering 78 (2): 512-521.

14. Islam, M. N. 1988. Size distribution analysis of ground wheat by hammer mill. Powder Technology 54 (4): 235-241.

15. Jindal, V. K., and L. G. Austin. 1976. The kinetics of hammer milling maize. Powder Technology 14 (1): 35-39.

16. Kermanshahi, H., A. Attar, A. Abbassipour, and A. Bayat. 2014. A Comprehensive Guide to the Technology and Processing of Animal, Poultry and Aquatic Feed. Scientific Research Department of Hezareh Novin Co., pp. 276, Mashhad. (In Farsi).

17. Kiani, S. 2006. Animal Husbandry. 2nd Edition, Daneshvaran Publication, pp. 295, Tehran. (In Farsi).

18. Mani, S., L. G. Tabil, and S. Sokhansang. 2006. Specific energy requirement for compaction corn stover. Bioresource Technology 97: 1420-1426.

19. Manlu, Y. U., A. R. Womac, P. I. Miu, C. Igathinathance, I. Sokhansanj, and S. Narayan. 2006. Direct energy measurement system for rotary biomass grinder-hammer mill. ASABE Annual International Meeting. Convention Center Portland, Oregon. Paper No: 066217.

20. Martin, S. A. 1985. Comparison of hammermill and roller mill grinding and the effect of grain particle size on mixing and pelleting master's thesis .Department of Grain Science and Industry, Kansas State University.

21. Miao, Z., T. E. Grift, A. C. Hansen, and K. C. Ting. 2011. Energy requirement for comminution of biomass in relation to particle physical properties. Industrial Crops and Products 33: 504-513.

22. Murphy, A., C. Collins, A. Philpotts, A. Bunyan, and D. Henman. 2009. Influence of hammer mill screen size and grain source (wheat or sorghum) on the growth performance of male grower pigs. Report prepared for the Co-operative Research Centre for an Internationally Competitive Pork Industry. Established and supported. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download.

23. Pishkar, J. 2000. Application and Service of Dairy Machines. Institute for Applied Higher Education in Tehran, pp. 152, Tehran. (In Farsi).

24. Pourazarang, H., and H. R. Ziaulhagh. 2002. Units Operation in Agricultural Products Processing. 1st Edition, Ferdowsi University Press, pp. 532, Mashhad. (In Farsi).

25. Reece, F. N., B. D. Lott, and J. W. Deaton. 1986. Effects of hammer mill screen size on ground corn particle size, pellet durability, and broiler performance. Poultry Science 65 (7): 1257-1261.

26. Rezvani, Z., Gh. Chegini, A. Arabhosseini, M. H. Kianmehr, and M. R. Asadi. 2013. Determining the specific energy consumption for grinding rice straw with a hammer mill. Journal of Automotive and Applied Mechnics 1 (1): 10-14.

27. Rouissi, T., A. Mahmoudi, R. D. Tyagi, S. K. Brar, D. Vost, and R. Y. Surampalli. 2007. Optimisation of spray drying by response surface methodology for the production of Sinorhizobium meliloti powder formulation by using starch industry wastewater. Biosystems Engineering 114 (3): 334-343.

28. Tavakoli, H., S. S. Mohtasebi, A. Jafari, and D. Mahdavinejad. 2009. Power requirement for particle size reduction of wheat straw as a function of straw threshing unit parameters. Australian Journal of Crop Science 3 (4): 231-236.

29. Tumuluru, J. S., L. G. Tabil, Y. Song, K. L. Iroba, and V. Meda. 2014. Grinding energy and physical properties of chopped and hammer-milled barley, wheat, oat, and canola straws. Biomass and Bioenergy 60: 58-67.

30. Vaezizadeh, M., and A. Ghaznfari-Moghaddam. 2008. Effect of adding moisture and storage time on the size of milled wheat particles. 5th National Congress on Agricultural Machinery and Mechanization, Mashhad, Iran. (In Farsi).