Evaluation of Storage Methods - Appendix

Evaluation of Storage Methods for WDGS with Added Forages and Byproducts in Silo Bags and Bunker Silos

Appendix: Select pictures of bag, treatments, process, splits, and bunker tests.

Read the study report
Date published: June 28, 2006

Figure 1. Bag of traditional WDGS at 65% moisture with different added forages. The numbers depict amount of forage added on a DM basis. As is observed, the bag did split when too low of levels were tested.

Figure 1 photo


Figure 3. Depiction of bag with different levels of forages and DDGS at 50 and 60% of the mixture. The bag was quite different in height and width depending on ability of forage or dry feed to pack easily with WDGS.

Figure 3 photo


Figure 5. Picture illustrates the different height and width of silo bags depending on forage or dry feed added. We evaluated the lower limits required and did break the bag with too little forage was added.

Figure 5 photo


Figure 7. After testing different levels of grass hay, alfalfa hay, and wheat straw, one bag was packed with 15% grass hay to ensure that bagging would work when just one forage was used at the recommended level. The bag did hold with 15% grass hay in this picture.

Figure 7 photo


Figure 9. Grass hay at 30% of DM and WDGS at 70% of DM. This mixture packed fairly well, but was more challenging to drive on.

Figure 9 photo


Figure 2. Bagging process whereby WDGS and forages were mixed in feed trucks with mixing capability, and then fed into the bagger.

Figure 2 photo


Figure 4. This picture illustrates the problem with bagging traditional WDGS alone with pressure. The bag has split due to too much pressure. Success is easily measured by maintaining bag integrity. However, when split, spoilage is inevitable and needs to be rebagged.

Figure 4 photo


Figure 6. Modified wet distillers grains at 45% DM (55% moisture) will bag with normal pressure as the picture illustrates.

Figure 6 photo


Figure 8. Bunker storage was evaluated using grass hay. More hay is required to be able to pack and store this mixture in a bunker. In this picture, 40% grass hay (DM basis) was tested and worked well.

Figure 8 photo


Figure 10. A side-by-side comparison of 40% grass hay and WDGS (left) and 30% grass hay and WDGS (right). Bunker sizes are not identical, but more bulk is produced with the 40% grass hay mixture as expected.

Figure 10 photo