Economic evaluation of milking systems in Alberta

ECONOMIC
EVALOATION OF

MILKING SYSTEMS

IN ALOERTA

/4lberra

AGRICULTURE

Production and Resource Economics Branch
Economic Services

February, 1985
AGDEX 821-36

Copies of this publication may be obtained from

Print Media Branch
Alberta Agriculture
7000 — 1 1 3 Street
Edmonton, Alberta, T6H 5T6
OR

Alberta Agriculture's district offices

ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF

MILKING SYSTEI4S IN ALBERTA

BY

RUDY SUSKO
&

LEN FULLEN

PRODUCTION & RESOURCE ECONOMICS BRANCH
ECONOMIC SERVICES
ALBERTA AGRICULTURE
DECE3yiBER, 1984

ACKiiKjmMX^mmrs

The authors wish to express their sincere gratitude to all of the
dairy farmers who allcwed us to monitor their milking operations and
obtain data for this study. Without their cooperation, information pre-
sented in this report would not have been possible. The assistance of
the Dairy Division, Alberta Agriculture is also gratefully acknowledged.

RUDY SUSKO
LEN FULLEN

Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2016

https://archive.org/details/economicevaluatiOOsusk

TABLE OF CDNTENTS

PAGE

V i

LIST OF TABLES iii

LIST OF FIGURES ..... . iii

SECTION

I INTRODUCTION . 1

II METHOD OF ANALYSIS 3

III DATA AND ASSUMPTION 6

IV ANALYSIS OF RESULTS .................. 11

V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ................ 19

APPENDIX A, SYSTEMS COST TABLES ............... 20

APPENDIX B, SYSTEMS LAYOUT DESIQ^ .............. 26

APPENDIX C, QUESTIONNAIRE 31

11

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE# PAGE

1 LABOUR AND INVEST1«T REQUIREMNTS FOR MILKING

SYSTEJyiS IN ALBERTA 9

2 COST EQUATIONS FOR 10 MILKING SYSTEMS 10

3 MILKING SYSTEM COST COMPARISONS WITH TIME RESTRICTIONS . . 12

4 MILKING SYSTEM COST COMPARISONS WITH NO TIME

PESTRICTIONS 17,18

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE#

1 MILKING SYSTEMS COST FOR VARIOUS HERD SIZES 14

2 MILKING SYSTEMS COST AT MAXIMUM CAPACITY ......... 15

iii

ga?i.it|. _ |», .V

■^^•■*‘ ■ "■‘’'''^^^'fl i4 - ■ " BBnr ' ^

"- ■■■^m j ' SI _

I . IMTODUCTION

Milking chores on a dairy farm are highly labour intensive. With
rising labour costs a trend to nodemised and highly inechanised milking
systems has become evident. Statistical distribution of producers by
herd size in Alberta indicates that the majority of milk is produced by
50-60 cow operations. The type, size and configuration of milking
systems in existence in Alberta is undoubtedly influenced by this fact.
Although, modem milking parlours are too costly on small farms, they are
conducive to milking efficiency on medium and large farms. The most
prevalent farm size in a particular production area will also have a
strong influence on the selection of milking systems in that area.

A summary of housing and milking systems used in Alberta in 1981
shews that 53.2 per cent of producers are using in-bam (stanchion)
milking systems and of that number 55.5 per cent use pipeline. The
remaining 46.8 producers use parlor milking systems.

Numerous studies have confirmed that labour cost is the most sign-
ificant item in milking system cost and in some cases can account for up
to 80 per cent of the milking system's total cost. It seems obvious that
the best way to minimize milking cost is to reduce labour requirements
through adopting a milking system of an efficient size and configuration
that meets both the cwners needs and herd size. However, it should be
realized that increased capital cost will at some point exceed the saving
in labour use, resulting in lower cost efficiency. The degree of utiliz-
ation of a system plays an important role in cost minimization and
therefore a system's suitability for a particular herd size is important.

The primary objective of this study was to conduct an economic
evaluation of alternative milking technologies commonly used in Alberta,
so that a least cost system could be identified for a given herd size
or a desired milking time.

1

More specifically the objectives were:

to establish the criteria for economic comparison of various
systems;

to determine the labour requirements for alternative systems
used in Alberta;

to establish the capital cost for selected milking systems
used in Alberta;

to identify the least cost system for a large range of herd
sizes and/or a given length of a milking shift.

2

II. METHOD OF ANALYSIS

Economic efficiency was used as the criteria for determining the
best systems fran selected milking systems commonly used on Alberta dairy
farms.

Econonic efficiency was defined by cost per unit of output or
average cost. It was therefore necessary to develop the unit^ cost for
all milking systems considered in this study.

Milking system, in this context, is defined as the milking proced-
ure and configuration of a milking facility. It does not include cow
housing or the milk house. Size and cost of the bam and milk house
equipment is determined by the size of herd, while the milking system is
a separate entity vhich can be used for different herd sizes. Although
herd size is iirportant, other factors such as labour use and investment
cost influence the selection of a milking system.

Selection of a particular milking system also depends on the desired
time for one milking shift. For a given herd size an operator would
likely decide on different systems if his desired length of milking shift
is 1.5 hours instead of 3 hours. To milk 1.5 hours he would need a
larger more expensive system than for a 3 hour milking shift. A trade-
off between capital and labour would result.

Milking system cost, as an efficiency measure, is catposed of labour
cost, capital cost and maintenance cost. Classification according to
fixed and variable cost is also important. The following diagram shows
the cost categories for a milking system.

CAPITAL

COST

LABOUR COST
SET-UP & CLEAN-UP

LABOUR COST
MILKING

MAINTENANCE

COST

FIXED COST

VARIABLE COST

The suitable unit of output volume is, in this particular case, the
number of cows handled by a system, although volume of milk could
similarly measure the output volume.

3

Variable costs are directly dependent on the volume of output, that
is, the number of ccws milked. If the number of ccms milked doubles,
then the labour cost for milking and maintenance (upkeep) will double.
This cannot be said about fixed costs, since the cost of capital (deprec-
iation and interest) and the labour cost for setup and cleanup would be
the same regardless of hew many cews are milked.

The follcwing formula shews the relationships between variable and
fixed costs and the nuittoer of cews.

C = F + N X V

Where: C is total cost

F is fixed cost
V is variable cost
N is number of cows

As the size of herd increases fixed costs will be spread over more
CCMS, thereby reducing the magnitude of the fixed costs. To determine
the ultimate measure of efficiency, that is, the average cost per cow,
the above equation must be divided by the number of ccms.

F

C = ~ + V
N

Where; C is average cost per cow

With a total cost approach, as the size of herd increases total
variable costs increase and fixed costs remain constant. With an average
cost approach the roles are reversed. Variable costs per ccw remain
unchanged and fixed costs decrease with herd size. For this reason, it
is important to distinguish between the terms total cost and average
cost.

The task remains to determine labour and capital costs for each
milking system considered in this study. Labour cost is directly related
to labour use. The labour requirement for each milking system is deter-
mined by the technical efficiency of each system. Technically the most
efficient system, that is, the highest throughput of cows per given time.

4

is not necessarily the most economically efficient. Initial cost and
thus the cost of capital will play an iirportant role.

In sunmary, the method used here to identify the most efficient
milking system is a comparison of costs per cow for selected systems most
commonly used in Alberta. The actual data used in establishing costs and
the assumptions associated with the data cire discussed in the following
section.

5

III. DATA AND ASSUMPTIC»^S

Rather than use the so-called normative or recomnended data for
selected milking systems, actual time data was collected from farms for
this study. It was found that the throughput often recorrmended differs
from actual practice.

The following milking systems were selected for comparison and
evaluation.

# OBSERVED

1.

Stanchion bam - buckets

S3^

7

2.

Stanchion bam - pipeline

S5

8

3.

Double 4 herrin(^Done

D4

7

4.

Double 4 herringbone (8 units)

D4-8

9

5.

Double 6 herringbone

D6

4

6.

Do\±)le 6 herringbone (12 units)

D6-12

8

7.

Double 8 herringbone

D8

5

8.

Double 8 herringbone (16 units)

D8-16

3

9.

Trigon 12

T12

7

10.

Rotary 14

R14

60

Examples of the general layout or design of these milking systems
are shewn in Appendix B.

Sixty farms were visited to obtain the information needed for
evaluation. An example of the questionnaire is shewn in Appendix C.

In order to establish the labour cost for each system good data had
to be obtained on the throughput for each system. A stop watch was used
to record the setup and cleanup time and the number of men carrying
out these tasks. Actual milking time was recorded for three and four
repetitions on each milking unit. For instance, for a system with four
units, the time for 16 cews being milked was recorded. The time started

These abbreviations are used interchangeably and the numbers represent
the number of milking units.

6

with the first cow entering and finished with the 16th ccw departing.
Total time (called parlor time) included all activities of milking chores
such as washing, installing and removing machine, actual milking, etc.
The milking unit activity is basically composed of two parts: actual

milking time and machine idle time before the unit is reconnected.
Actual milking tijnne is more or less determined biologically, but idle
time is influenced by the configuration and size of the milking system
and the operator's skill and pace. Given the average time length for
milking a cow, the per cent idle time can be calculated by:

Tm X N
Tp X U

per cent of idle time
milking time of a cow (minutes)
total parlor time
number of milking units

Sometimes milking chores are carried out by more than one man. In
comparing labour requirements for the various milking systems, the work
has to be adjusted to a one man operation. Machine idle time was useful
in making that adjustment.

Working pace is another factor that influences labour requirements.
Adjustments were made for an average working pace, so that the results
would shew efficiency of the system, not the operator.

Milk production and degree of mechanization could be considered as
additional factors affecting the milking time. It is not always true
that higher producing cews milk longer or vice versa. A relationship
between milk production and milking time was not apparent. While overall
the milking time was influenced by the degree of mechanization, it was
reflected in incremental capital cost. Higher mechanized systems were
using less labour but were more capital intensive. There was no signifi-
cant difference in degree of mechanization of the systems studied. The
occurrence of power gates and autcmatic take-off units was considered an
incremental cost to the cost of the basic system.

Recorded milking time for one shift served as the basis for calcul-
ating annual labour cost using a rate of $7.00 per hour. Cost of capital

Ti = 1 -

Where:

Ti

Tm

Tp

U

7

8

was calculated from the investinent value of each irdlking system as listed
in Table 1. Depreciation was calculated at 5 per cent of building
(parlor) value and 10 per cent of equipment value. Interest charges were
calculated on average investnent value at 12 per cent interest.

Due to the different nature of the in-bam (stanchion) milking
systanns, capital cost of the S3 and S5 systems is composed of value for
the equipment only and not for housing. Some equipment, stanchion stalls
and pipeline are expressed on a per cow basis, because they vary as to
bam size and herd size. However, the value of milking units and pumps
would be the same regardless of herd size, similar to a parlor type
facility. This has implication in calculating the total cost since a
portion of the capital cost is variable and will depend on the herd size.

TABLE 1; LABOUR AND INVES'^ElSiT REQUIREMENTS FOR MILKING SYSTEMS
IN ALBERTA

SYSTEM

SETUP &
CLEANUP TIME

MILKING TIME
MIN. /COW

INVESTMEtLT^

BUILDING EQUIPMENT

S3

32.33

2.69

_

$5400 + 237/Cow

S5

43.33

2,01

-

7200 + 371/Cow

D4

23.77

1.96

$14143

17256

D4-8

26.34

1.67

14143

23637

D6

35.60

1.76

18160

24300

D6-12

37.56

1.17

18160

31534

D8

34.02

1.33

21767

27888

D8-16

37.80

1.07

21767

38508

T12

38.78

0.96

18490

37164

R14

29.77

0.99

23005

39568

Based on Boeckh Building Cost Guide (1984)

9

Table 2 shows cost equations for all ten systems. Total system cost
for any herd size is calculated by multiplying the variable cost by the
number of ccws and then adding the fixed cost. Average cost is calculat-
ed by dividing the equation by the number of ccms, i.e. dividing fixed
cost by nuntoer of ccms and adding variable cost.

These equations along with the information from Table 1 are useful
in finding the relationships between cost and herd size, and cost and
milking shift time shewn in the following section and the appendix.

TABLE 2: COST EQUATIONS FOR 10 MILKING SYSTEMS

SYSTEM FIXED COST VARIABLE COST

Stanchion

- buckets 3

3596.00

283.97

X

No.

of

Cows

Stanchion

- pipeline 5

4813.35

253.64

X

No.

of

Cows

H. Double

4

6302.00

192.65

X

No.

of

Cows

H. Double

4-8

7500.50

168.52

X

No.

of

Cows

H. Double

6

8838.50

181.03

X

No.

of

Cows

H. Double

6-12

10304.25

123.87

X

No.

of

Cows

H. Double

8

9664.00

140.79

X

No.

of

Cows

H. Double

8-16

11642.75

118.00

X

No.

of

Cows

Trigon 12

11152.75

104.02

X

No.

of

Cows

Rotary 14

11261.75

110.12

X

No.

of

Cows

10

IV. ANALYSIS OF RESULTS

There is no one least-cost system. The efficiency of a system
varies with the degree of utilization, i.e. the volume of output. A
large modem system would be underutilized and costly for a small herd
but might be ideal for a large farm. Furthermore technical efficiency^
is not necessarily indicative of economic efficiency. Although labour
use and labour cost are significant in determining a system's efficiency,
overall econcmic efficiency also depends on capital cost.

Results are shewn in two ways; a cost comparison for a given length
of milking shift and a cost ca:tparison for a given herd size.

Cost Versus Length Of The Milking Shift

The survey shewed that the average desired length of a milking shift
is 1 3/4 hour. This of course varies with the size of herd. In the
analysis we chose to determine milking herd size for a given length of
morning and afternoon milking shifts. Once a system's capacity is
determined in this way, the resulting costs can be calculated for each
system.

Table 3 shews hew costs per cow corpared for a range of herd sizes
utilizing the 10 milking systems studied. A stanchion bam with 3
milking units (S3) can handle only 22 cows when the milking shift is 60
minutes long. The same system can handle 67 cows if the milking time is
three hours long. Through greater utilization, annual milking system
cost can be reduced from $445.19 per cow with 1 hour milking time to
$337.71 with three hours milking time.

It was assumed that 3 hours of milking for one shift would be
maximum for a family operation. This is milking time only and excludes
the time for setting up and cleaning, as was shown in Table 1. A Trigon
system with 12 milking units appears to have the highest capacity of 188

Highest throughput for a given time.

11

TABLE 3:

i'ULKING SYSTEM GOST GOMPAJILSONS WITH TL^IE RESTRICTIONS

LABOUR

LABOUR

HERD

MINUTES

CAPITAL

COST

COST

UPKEEP

TOTAL

SYSTEM

SIZE

/OOW

GOST

CLEAN.

MIIK.

COST

COST

1*0 HOUR MILKING

S3

22*30

4*14

74*74

123*45

229*10

17*90

445*19

S5

29*85

3*46

95*50

123*62

171*18

24*58

414*89

HD4

30*61

2*74

139*73

66*13

166*93

25*72

398*51

HD4-8

35*93

2*40

146*33

62*44

142*23

26*29

377*28

HD6

34*09

2*80

170*33

88*94

149*89

31*14

440*29

HD6-12

51*28

1*94

135*23

65*70

99*64

24*23

324*80

HD8

45*11

2*08

149*99

64*22

113*27

27*52

355*01

HD8-16

56*07

1*74

150*22

57*41

91*13

26*87

325*63

T12

62*50

1*58

125*60

52*84

81*76

22*26

282*47

R14

60*61

1*48

143*98

41*83

84*31

25*81

295*94

2*0 HOUR MILKING

S3

44*61

3*41

55*86

61*72

229*10

17*90

364*58

S5

59*70

2*74

76*69

61*81

171*18

24*58

334*27

HD4

61*22

2*35

69*86

33*07

166*93

25*72

295*53

HD4-8

71*86

2*04

73*16

31*22

142*23

26*29

272*90

HD6

68*18

2*28

85*16

44*47

149*89

31 * 14

310*66

HD6-12

102*56

1*56

67*62

32*85

99*64

24*23

224*34

HD8

90*23

1*71

75*00

32*11

113*27

27*52

247*90

Hri8~16

112*15

1*41

75*11

28*71

91*13

26*87

221*81

T12

125*00

1*27

62*80

26*42

81*76

22*26

193*24

R14

121*21

1*24

71*99

20*92

84*31

25*81

203*03

2*5 HOUR MILKING

S3

55*76

3*27

52*08

49*38

229*10

17*90

348*46

S5

74*63

2*59

72*93

49*45

171 * 18

24*58

318*14

HD4

76*53

2*27

55*89

26*45

166*93

25*72

274*99

HD4-8

89*82

1*96

58*53

24*98

142*23

26*29

252*02

HD6

85*23

2*18

68*13

35*57

149*89

31*14

284*74

HD6-12

128*21

1*48

54 * 09

26*28

99*64

24*23

204*24

HD 8

112*78

1*63

60*00

25*69

113*27

27*52

226*48

HD8-16

140*19

1*34

60*09

22*96

91 * 13

26*37

201*05

T12

156*25

1*2:1

50*24

21 * 14

31*76

22*26

1 75 * 40

R14

151*52

1 * 19

57*59

16*73

84*31

25*81

184*45

3*0 HOUR MILKING

S3

66*91

3*17

49*56

41*15

229*10

17*90

337*71

S5

89*55

2*49

70*42

41*21

171*18

24*58

307*39

HD4

91*84

2 * 22

46*58

22*04

166*93

25*72

261*27

HD4-8

107*78

1*91

48*78

20*81

142*23

26*29

238 * 1 1

HD6

102*27

2 * ;l. 1

56*78

29*65

149*89

3 1*14

267*45

HD6-:L2

153*85

1*43

45*08

2 1 * 90

99*64

24*23

190*85

HD8

135*34

1*58

50*00

21*41

113*27

27*52

212*20

HD8 - ;l.6

168*22

1 ♦ 29

50*07

19*14

9 1 * 1 3

26*87

187*21

11 2

1 87*50

1 * 17

41*87

17*61

81 *76

22*26

163*50

R14

181*82

1 * 15

47*99

13*94

84*31

2 ♦ 8 1

172*06

12

ccws and a least cost of $163.50 per cov, while the S3 system has lowest
capacity and highest cost. Figure 2 shows the efficiency of each syston
at maximum capacity i.e. a three hour milking limit. It also shews the
relationship between labour cost and capital cost.

The irrportance of system utilization on efficiency is shown in
Figure 1. The T12 curve shews a reduction in cost as milking time
increases^ from 1 hour to 3 hours. The T12 system cost is $163.50 for a
188 cow herd but increases to $282.47 for a 63 cow herd. For siuplicity.
Figure 1 shews the cost trend for 4 systems only. The envelope curve of
these 4 cost curves shews the least cost points for the indicated cow
numbers. Cost curves for the other 6 systems are shown in Figure 4 in
the appendix.

Figure 5 in the appendix summarizes the cost analysis at different
milking times. The upper graphs shew tlie cost per cow and the bottom
graphs shew the herd size with three different milking times for all 10
systems.

Cost Versus Herd Size

Costs were also determined for a given number of cews being handled
by a system with no restrictions on milking time. Table 4 shows the cost
of each milking system for various herd sizes. The relationship is
graphically illustrated in Figure 3 of the appendix. When only 25 cows
are being milked the S3 system would have the lowest cost since larger
systems would be underutilized and their capital cost would be propor-
tionately higher. For a 25 cow herd size the HD8-16 system would be most
costly at $583.71 per cow. Actual milking would take only 27 minutes.

The number of cews handled increases fron 63 to 188 as shewn in
Table 3. Figure 1 is based on Table 3 values.

13

450

400

350

300

250

200

150-

MILKING SYSTEMS COST
FOR VARIOUS HERD SIZES

■' r-p- 1 ^ ^ ^ . . ^ > r— , . 1 . ^ ^ ^ ^ 1 1—. ^ ^ ^ ^ . . . I r

50 100 150 200

NUMBER OF CONS

14

o

Lf)

00

—I

m

COST - $ PER COW

^

M

4=^

o

O

O

O

o

o

O

O

O

Q

o

>

Q

M

o

C

H

*t!

P

O

o

o

o

o

CO

o

CO

CO

15

The graphs in Figure 3 clearly demonstrate that for a 150 cow herd
the T12 system is the least cost system and the S3 becomes the most
expensive one. As herd size increases the proportion of capital cost
decreases, v^ile labour cost changes only slightly. The length of milk-
ing shift for the S3 system increases from 1:20 hours for 25 cows to 6:43
hours^ for 150 ccms.

Other tables and figures are included in the appendix, showing
various combinations of herd sizes and milking times so that producers
can relate the efficiency of each system to their own situation.

This is perhaps beyond the practical range, but it does show that S3
system would not be used for a 150 co/j herd and T12 would not be
used for a 25 cow herd.

16

TABLE 4: imiKING SYSTEM COST COMPARISONS WITH NO TIME RESTRICTIONS

LABOUR

LABOUR

HOURS

MINUTES

CAPITAL

COST

COST

UPKEEP

TOTAL

SYSTEM

/SHIFT

/COW

COST

CLEAN.

MILK.

COST

COST

25 COW

HERD

S3

1*12

3.98

70.67

110.14

229.10

17.90

427.81

35

0*84

3.74

102.80

147.61

171 . 18

24.58

446.18

HD 4

0*82

2.91

171 . 10

80.98

166.93

25.72

444.72

HD4-B

0,70

2.72

210.29

89.73

142.23

26.29

468.54

HD6

0*73

3.18

232.26

121.28

149.89

31 .14

534.57

HD6-12

0.49

2.75

277.40

134.77

99.64

24.23

536.04

HD8

0 . 55

2.69

270.67

115.89

113 <27

27.52

527.35

HD8-16

0.45

2.58

336.94

128.77

91.13

26.87

583.71

T12

0.40

2.51

314.00

132.11

81.76

22.26

550.13

R14

0.41

2.18

349.05

101.42

84.31

25.81

560.59

50 COW

HERD

S3

2.24

3.34

53.82

55.07

229.10

17.90

355.89

35

1.67

2.88

80.34

73.81

171.18

24.58

349.91

HD4

1.63

2.44

85 . 55

40.49

166.93

25.72

318.69

HD4-8

1.39

2.20

105.14

44.87

142.23

26.29

318.53

HD6

1.47

2.47

116.13

60.64

149.89

31.14

357.80

HD6-12

0.97

1.96

138.70

67.38

99.64

24.23

329.96

HDB

1 . 1 1

2.01

135.33

57.95

113.27

27.52

334.07

HD8-16

0.89

1 .83

168.47

64.39

91 . 13

26.87

350.85

T12

0.80

1.74

157.00

66.06

31.76

22.26

327.08

r:L4

0.83

1.59

174.52

50.71

84.31

25.81

335.36

75 COW

HERD

S3

3.36

3.12

48.20

36.71

229.10

17.90

331.92

S5

2.51

2.59

72.85

49.20

171.18

24 . 58

317.82

HD4

2.45

2.28

57.03

26.99

166.93

25.72

276.67

HD4-8

2.09

2.02

70.10

29.91

142.23

26 . 29

268.52

HD6

2.20

2.23

77.42

40.43

149.89

31 . 14

298.88

HD6-;l.2

1.46

1 . 70

92.47

44 . 92

99.64

24.23

261.26

HD 8

1.66

1 . 78

90.22

38.63

113.27

2 .52

269.64

HD8-16

1 . 34

1 . 57

112.31

42.92

91 . 13

26.87

273.24

T12

1.20

1 . 48

104.67

44,04

81.76

22.26

252.72

R1.4

1.24

1.39

116. 35

33.81

84.31

25.81

260.28

100 COW HERD

S3

4.48

3.01

45.40

27.53

229.10

17.90

319.93

S5

3.35

2.44

69 . 1 1

36.90

171 . 1 8

24.58

301.78

HD4

3.27

2.20

42.77

20.24

166.93

25.72

255.67

HD4-8

2.78

1.93

52.57

22.43

142.23

26.29

243.52

HD6

2.93

2.12

58.07

30.32

149.89

31 . 14

269.42

HD6 - 12

1.95

1.57

69.35

33 ♦ 69

99 . 64

24.23

226.91

HDB

2 . 2 2

1 . 67

67.67

28.97

113.27

27.52

237.43

HD 8- 16

1 . 78

1.45

84.23

32.19

91 . 13

26.87

234.43

T12

1.60

1 . 35

78 . 50

33.03

81 .76

22 . 26

215.55

R14

1 . 5

1.29

87.26

25.35

84.31

25.81

222.74

17

T/iBLE 4 (Continued) : MILKING SYSTEl4 COST COMPARISONS WITH NO TIME RESTRICTIONS

LABOUR

LABOUR

HOURS

MINUTES

CAPITAL

COST

COST

UPKEEP

TOTAL

SYSTEM

/SHIFT

/COW

COST

CLEAN.

MILK.

COST

COST

150 COU

HURD

S3

6*72

2*91

42*59

18*36

229*10

17*90

307*94

S5

5*03

2*30

65 * 36

24*60

171*18

24*58

285*73

HD4

4*90

2*12

28*52

13*50

166*93

25*72

234*66

HD4-8

4*17

1*85

35*05

14*96

142*23

26*29

218*52

HD6

4*40

2*00

38*71

20*21

149*89

31*14

239*95

HD6-12

2*92

1*43

46*23

22*46

99*64

24*23

192*57

HD3

3*33

1*56

45 * 1 1

19*32

113*27

27*52

205*22

HD8-16

2*68

1*32

56*16

21*46

91*13

26*87

195*62

TJ.2

2*40

I * 22

52*33

22*02

81*76

22*26

178*37

R14

2*47

1 * 19

58*17

16*90

84*31

25*81

185*20

175 COW

HERD

S3

7*85

2*87

41*79

15*73

229*10

17*90

304*52

S5

5*86

2*26

64*29

21*09

171*18

24*58

281*15

HD4

5*72

2*10

24*44

1 1 * 57

166*93

25*72

228*66

HD4-8

4*87

1*82

30*04

12*82

142*23

26*29

211*38

HD6

5* .13

1*96

33*18

17*33

149*89

31*14

231*54

HD6-12

3*41

1 * 40

39*63

19*25

99*64

24*23

182*75

HD8

3*88

1*52

38*67

16*56

113*27

27*52

196*01

HD8-16

3*12

1*29

48*13

18*40

91 * 13

26*87

184*53

TI2

2*80

1*18

44*86

18*87

81*76

22*26

167*75

R14

2*89

1*16

49*86

14*49

84*31

25*81

174*48

200 COW

HERD

S3

8*97

2 * 85

41*18

13*77

229*10

17*90

301*95

S5

6*70

2*23

63*49

18*45

171*18

24*58

277*71

HD4

6*53

2*08

21*39

10*12

166*93

25*72

224*16

HD4-8

5*57

1*80

26*29

11*22

142*23

26*29

206*02

HD6

5*87

1*94

29*03

15*16

149*89

31*14

225 * 22

HD6-12

3*90

1 * 37

34*68

16*85

99*64

24*23

175*39

HD8

4*43

1 * 50

33*83

14*49

113*27

27*52

189*11

HD8“16

3*57

1 * 26

42*12

16*10

91 ♦ 13

26*87

176*21

T12

3*20

1 * 15

39*25

16*51

81*76

22*26

159*79

R14

3*30

1 * 14

43 * 63

12*68

84*31

25*81

166*43

250 COW

HERD

S3

1 1*21

2*82

40*34

1 1 *01

229*10

17*90

298*36

S5

8*37

2*18

62*37

14*76

171 * 18

24*58

272*89

HD4

8*17

2*06

1 7 * 1 .1

8*10

166*93

25*72

217*86

HD4-8

6*96

1 * 78

21*03

O O 7

K.} <• /

142*23

O/j ^ oo

198*52

HD 6

7*33

:i. * 90

23 * 23

12.13

149*89

31 * 14

216*38

HD 6- .1.2

4*87

1 * 33

27 > 74

13*48

99*64

24 * 23

165*09

HD8

5*54

1*47

27*07

1 1*59

113*27

27*52

179*44

HD8-16

4*46

1*22

33*69

12*88

91 * 13

26*87

164*57

T12

4*00

1 * 12

31 *40

13*21

81 *76

22*26

148*63

r:i.4

4*12

1 * 1 1

34*90

;l 0 * 1 4

84*31

25*8 1

155*17

18

V. SUMMARY AND OONCIiUSIONS

Labour can account for as much as 80 per cent of a milking system's
total cost. Today's dairy farm operators want to knew how labour
requirements and labour and capital costs connpare for alternative milking
systems.

The ten milking systems most coitmonly used on Alberta dairy farms
were cotpared in this study. The objective was to identify a least cost
system for a given herd size or a desired milking time.

Actual milking times were recorded from farm visits and the farm
operators were asked hew much time they would ideally like to spend
setting up, milking and cleaning up each day. Current investment
requirements for dairy buildings and equipment were used in a coEiputer
program developed to help determine corpatible herd sizes and related
costs for each of the ten milking systems when the desired milking time
per shift ranged from one to three hours.

When three hours was set as a maximum milking time (excluding
setting up and cleanup) for a family operation the trigon 12 had the
least cost of $164 per cow and could handle 188 cows. The stanchion
bam with 3 milking units had a cost of $338 and would handle only 67
cews. The other systems had costs ranging between $310 and $180 and
could handle fron 90 to 182 cews v^en three hours was available for each
milking shift.

When 67 cews were being milked in a stanchion bam with 3 milking
units, labour cost accounted for 82 per cent of the $338 total cost.
When a trigon 12 was used to milk 188 cows, labour cost accounted for
only 55 per cent of the $164 total milking cost.

The relative costs of the ten milking systems depended on how
intensively each system was used and no one least cost system could be
found.

19

APPENDIX A

ADDITIONAL
SYSTEMS COST TABLES
AND FIGURES

TABLE 5:

SYSTEM COST AND MILKING Tir^IE

COST PER ca^ ($)

^COWS

SYSTEM"' — .

^ 25

50

75

100

150

175

200

S3

427.81

355.89

331.92

319.93

307.94

304.52

301.95

S5

446.18

349.91

317.82

301.78

285.73

281.15

277.71

HD4

444.72

318.69

276.67

255.67

234.66

228.66

224.16

HD4-8

468.54

318.53

268.52

243.52

218.52

211.38

206.02

HD6

534.57

357.80

298.88

269.42

239.95

231.54

225.22

HD6-12

536.04

329.96

261.26

226.91

192.57

182.75

175.39

HD8

527.35

334.07

269 « 64

237.43

205.22

196.01

189.11

HD8-16

583.71

350.85

273.24

234.43

195.62

184.53

176.21

T12

550.13

327.08

252.72

215.55

178.37

167.75

159.79

R14

560.59

335.36

260.28

222.74

185.20

174.48

166.43

S3

79.3

79.8

% LABOUR COST
80.1 80.2

80.4

80.4

80.4

S5

71.5

70.0

69.3

68.9

68.5

68.4

68.3

HD4

55.7

65.1

70.1

73.2

76.9

78.1

78.9

HD4-8

49.5

58.7

64.1

67.6

71.9

73.4

74.5

HD6

50.7

58.8

63.7

66.9

70.9

72.2

73.3

HD6-12

43.7

50.6

55.3

58.8

63.4

65.1

66.4

HD8

43.6

51.3

56.3

59.9

64.6

66.2

78.1

HD8-16

37.7

44.3

49.1

52.6

57.6

59.4

60.9

T12

38.9

45.2

49.8

53.3

58.2

59.9

61.5

R14

33.1

40.3

45.4

49.2

54.6

56.6

58.3

S3

1

07

2:14

MILKING TIME (HRS.)
3:22 4:29

6:43

7:51

8:58

S5

50

1:40

2:31

3:21

5:02

5:52

6:42

HD4

49

1:38

2:27

3:16

4:54

5:43

6:32

HD4-8

42

1:23

2:05

2:47

4:10

4:52

5:34

HD6

44

1:28

2:12

2:56

4:24

5:08

5:52

HD6-12

29

:58

1:28

1:57

2:55

3:25

3:54

HD8

33

1:07

1:40

2:13

3:20

3:53

4:26

HD8-16

27

:53

1:20

1:47

2:41

3:07

3:34

T12

24

:48

1:12

1:36

2:24

2:48

3:12

R14

25

:50

1:14

1:39

2:28

2:53

3:18

21

MILKING SYSTLM

HOURS MILKING

X

a

m

cn

o

HOURS MLKING

O K) 4^ O 00

ft-- > !■ I,.,— I ■ II

$ PER COW

22

COSTS AND MILKING TIME FOR VARIOUS HERD SIZES

MILKING SYSTEMS COST
FOR VARIOUS HERD SIZES

200

MfLK5^4G SYSTEM MLKMS SYSTEM MLKWG SYSTEM

o

HERD SIZE

I

g

S!

8

X

o

(Z

X

o

id

m

HERD SIZE

$ PER COW

O H

c H

” P $ PER cow

a

U1

HERD SIZE

I PER COW

es

24

COSTS & CAPACITY FOR VARIOUS MILKING TIMES

MILKING S <S7EM MILKING SYSTEM MILKMJ SYSTEM

$ PER CO~N

% PER COW

X

m

X)

o

W

M

p

2

o

Ln

U’

d

o

o

iD

M

m

ho

cn

25

MILKING SYSTEMS COST FOP VARIOUS HERD SIZES

APPENDIX B

SYSTEJyiS LAYOUT DESIGNS

26

Door

Manger

NO. 722-1 SDB-2

27

FACE OUT STANCHION BARN

DRAIN

FEEDER

MILKING

PIT

7-8m

22-26 ft.

COW PLATFORM

FRO'IT

GATE

OPERATOR
DOOR

6m

18-20 ft

NO. 722-1 MP-6

MILKING PARLOUR - DOUBLE HERRINGBONE

Cow

Exit

Cow Entrance

i

I

I

29

NO. 722-1 MP-8

rOLKlNC: PAKl.OUR POLYGON

Cov; Cow

Exit Entrance

On rotary herringbone platforms, the cows enter and exit individually ... and
are positioned at an angle to the direction of rotation facing the outside of the
platform. Hieir bodies fit together in a fashion similar to conventional herring-
bone parlours. Thus, the rotary herringbone is smaller in size than a rotary
tandem, and the cow’s udders are closer together. The milker works from the inside
of the platform. These platforms generally rotate continuously, allowing 18-35
seconds per stall with provision for emergency stopping.

30

NO. 722-1 MP-12

MILKING PARLOUR - ROTARY HERRINGBONE

APPENDIX C
QUESTIONNAIRE

31*

Milking System Evaluation (data sheet)

Name:

Herd Size:

Mechanization: CG PG FG AW

Milking System:

Date :

PS SS AMD other

Time (min.) # of Cows # of men Time (min.)

1 , Set up time (AM)

(PM)

2. Parlor time (AM)

(PM)

3o Machine time (AM)

(PM)

4, Cleanup time (AM)

(PM)

AM

AM

PM

PM

Desired Milking Time: AM PM

Working pace: 12345

Work satisfaction: 12345 explain

Original price of parlor:

$

Year:

Replacement value:

$

Annual repair cost:

$

Insurance:

Corrment and observations:

32