1. Fuel Savings

2. FUEL SAVINGS Variable Fuel Consumption Costs: • Mixing Time • Required Power Feed Mixers have different fuel consumption. Why?

5. CONSUMPTION TRACTOR SIZE John Deere 3100 41 kW/55 HP – 11,8 l/h Same Aster 60 VDT 44 kW/60 HP – 12,4 l/h Same Dorado 70 52kW/65 HP – 14,9 l/h Same Silver 80 VDT 59 kW/75 HP – 17,9 l/h Deutz-Fahr Agroton 90 MK3 65 kW/ 88 HP – 19,9 l/h Massey Ferguson 4355 74 kW/100 HP – 20,7 l/h Same Antares 110 VDT 81kW/110 HP – 22,9 l/h [Fonte: DLG Test]

6. 11 m³ SABRE 2 AUGERS 1 TMR = 35 min Power need = 60 HP 1 TMR = 7.23 l 365 TMR/year x 7.23 = 2.638,95 € SABRE VS VERTICAL MIXER 11 m³ VERTICAL 1 TMR = 40 min Power need = 65 HP 1 TMR = 9.93 365 TMR/year x 9.93 = 3.624,45 € Fuel Savings: Δ985,50 € 1 year Δ 4.927,50 € 5 years

7. 11 m³ KING 2 + 2 AUGERS 1 TMR = 25 min Power need = 55 HP 1 TMR = 4.91 l 365 TMR/year x 4.91 = 1.792.15 € KING VS VERTICAL MIXER 11 m³ VERTICAL 1 TMR = 40 min Power need = 60 HP 1 TMR = 9.93 365 TMR/year x 9.93 = 3.624,45 € Fuel Savings: Δ1.832,30 € 1 year Δ 9.161,50 € 5 years

8. 11 m³ KING 2 + 2 AUGERS 1 TMR = 25 min Power need = 55 HP 1 TMR = 4.91 l 365 TMR/year x 4.91 = 1.792.15 € KING VS SABRE 11 m³ SABRE 2 AUGERS 1 TMR = 35 min Power need = 65 HP 1 TMR = 7.23 365 TMR/year x 7.23 = 2.638,95 € Fuel Savings: Δ846,8 € 1 year Δ 4.234,00 € 5 years

9. TIME FACTOR 40/45’30/35’20/25’

10. POWER FACTOR 65 HP60 HP55 HP

11. WHAT IS THE T.M.R? The theoretical assumption on which this device is based is that the animal, when eating a food mixture prepared in the correct way, takes an optimal sample of its rations in each mouthful, containing all the dietiary ingredients in their correct ratio. The term ‘unifeed’ identifies a preparation technique for rations based on shredding and mixing the different diet ingredients with the help of a suitable device: THE FEED-MIXER

12. VANTAGE OF T.M.R In comparison with the traditional type of feeding, which does not allow for mixing forage and concentrates, the use of the unifeed shredder-mixer allows a series of advantages for feeding and management: • it reduces the animal’s ability to select the more appetising foods in its diet, so that their consumption is diluted over the entire day. • it stimulates an increase in the consumption of drystuff; • it guarantees more uniform and constant conditions in the rumen, and so avoids • marked peaks in fermentation, with consequent falls in pH; • it reduces the risk of metabolic disorders; • it allows foods which are less appetising to be used; • it reduces the time needed, and simplifies the operation, of distributing food. • In the last analysis, this means a state of improved wellbeing for the animal, with a consequent improvement in its production.

13. BREEDING STRUCTURE • - Better flexibility in partition of functional areas • Easier structures ORGANISATION - Daily food distribution - Flexibility in diary management - Reduced labour costs - Better animal control - Lighter work FEEDING TECHNIQUE - Perfect recipe preparation - Broader range of products which can be used - The animal cannot choose single components - Waste reduced NUTRITION - Constant rumen pH - Better dry matter intake - Better use of nutritional principles PRODUCTION - More constant lactation curve - Higher milk production per head - Higher milk fat content HEALTH ASPECTS - Reduced mastits - Reduced feet infections - Reduced bad metabolism BEHAVIOUR - Reduced competition in the trough - Quieter animals