A model for the field drying of grass in windrows

Smith, Edward A.; Duncan, E.J.; McGechan, M.B.; Haughey, D. P.

doi:10.1016/0021-8634(88)90212-0

Cited by 25 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The vapour-pressure deficit, which depends on temperature and relative humidity of the air and the moisture content of the seeds, drives moisture away from the plant. Wind facilitates moisture movement and is an important factor when the moisture content of the crop is high (Smith et al 1988 (Tang et al 1990).…”

Section: Dehydration Of Lentil Seeds In the Fieldmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of harvest methods on moisture content and quality of lentil seeds

Tang¹,

Sokhansanj²,

Sosulski³

et al. 1992

Can. J. Plant Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. Effect of harvest methods on moisture content and quality of lentil seed. Can. J. Plant Sci. 72: [451][452][453][454][455][456]. The effects of desiccation and swathing on moisture content and quality of lentil seeds were studied. Topography of the field resulted in seed moisture content ranging from 18.2 to 545%. Desiccation with diquat resulted in more rapid dehydration of lentil seeds than with swathing, but these seeds required a longer time to cook.Key words: Lentil, harvesting, swathing, desiccation, moisture content, quality Tang, J., Sokhansanj Tang et al. (1990) reported that swathing prior to or during rainy weather leads to discoloration and sprouting of the seeds. Desiccation is a practical alternative to swathing, but its effect on cooking quality and germination of lentil seed has not been studied.The objectives of the current study were to determine the variability in seed moisture content in a lentil freld and compare the effects of swathing and desiccation with diquat ( 1, l' -Ethylen e-2,2' -bipy ridylium ion) on the Can. J. Plant. Sci. 72:45r-456 (Apr. 1992) rate ofdehydration oflentil seeds. The effects of moisture content and desiccation on cooking quality and germination were also investigated.

show abstract

Section: Dehydration Of Lentil Seeds In the Fieldmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of harvest methods on moisture content and quality of lentil seeds

Tang¹,

Sokhansanj²,

Sosulski³

et al. 1992

Can. J. Plant Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Aggressive conditioning increases not only the drying rate but also leaf loss (Greenlees, et al, 2000). Placing conditioned forage in a wide swath at cutting has the greatest impact on reducing drying time (Smith et al, 1988). Drying rate is also positively related to solar radiation and vapor pressure deficit, or the difference between the amount of moisture in the air and how much moisture the air can hold when saturated (Savoie and Mailhot, 1986).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At 1100 h on each of three consecutive days, a single swath was cut at a 4‐inch stubble across all species and replicates with a self‐propelled windrower (Model WD2303; CNH North America, New Holland, PA) equipped with a 16‐ft rotary disc head (Model RD163; CNH North America, New Holland, PA) and a chevron steel, roll‐type conditioner adjusted to a 3‐mm gap. The windrower was set to lay an 8‐ft wide swath to maximize drying rate (Smith et al, 1988) within the constraints of the windrower wheel spacing and conditioner width. No further manipulation of the forage was performed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Field Drying‐Rate Differences Among Three Cool‐Season Grasses

Brink

Digman²,

Muck

2014

Forage grazinglands

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conserving cool‐season grasses as silage or hay remains a challenge due to the time required for field curing and the unpredictability of the weather. We compared the drying rates of three grasses with differing yield potential, morphology, and physical characteristics. Inflorescence‐stage meadow fescue (Festuca pratensis Huds. subsp. pratensis [syn. Schedonorus pratensis (Huds.) P. Beauv.]), orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata L.), and reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea L.) were cut and swathed with field‐scale equipment at 1100 h on three consecutive days of early June in each of 2 years. Moisture, drying rate, and nutritive value were measured hourly until 1600 h and over the same time frame during the following 2 days. Despite differences in leaf‐to‐stem ratio and windrow density, there were few differences in drying rate (mean of 0.229, 0.150, and 0.119/h on the first, second, and third days, respectively). In one year, meadow fescue had lower initial moisture content at harvest than the other grasses, potentially allowing earlier processing into silage on the first day of curing. Species will probably not have an impact on drying rate of cool‐season grasses harvested at the same relative maturity.

show abstract

“…However, field drying is a complex biophysical process involving water retaining properties of the biomass, energy absorption and utilization and removal of vapor from the swath (Nilsson et al, 2005). For this reason, several empirical approaches have been pursued based on diffusion equations, or energy balance approaches considering mass and energy flows (Jenkins et al, 1984;Smith et al, 1988;Monteith and Unsworth, 1990;Atzema, 1992;Nilsson et al, 2005). Nevertheless, there is lack of information concerning the distribution of moisture either along the vertical allocation or along the horizontal allocation of the grass over the whole field, although wide differences in silage moisture content can affect fermentation characteristics of any silage (Hopkins, 2000).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Moisture content evaluation of biomass using CFD approach

Bartzanas

Bochtis

Sørensen

et al. 2012

Sci. agric. (Piracicaba, Braz.)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In grass conservation systems, drying in the field is an essential process upon which the quality and quantity of the material to be conserved is dependent on. In this study a Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) model, previously validated, was used to assess qualitatively and quantitatively the field drying process of cut grass under different weather conditions and structural specifications of the grass. The use of the CFD model depicts the climate heterogeneity in the grass area with a special focus on moisture distribution, influence of the weather conditions, in order to create the possibility of applying the model as a decision support tool for an enhanced treatment of the grass after cutting.

show abstract

A model for the field drying of grass in windrows

Cited by 25 publications

References 11 publications

Effect of harvest methods on moisture content and quality of lentil seeds

Effect of harvest methods on moisture content and quality of lentil seeds

Field Drying‐Rate Differences Among Three Cool‐Season Grasses

Moisture content evaluation of biomass using CFD approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About