ICAR Technical Series no. 7 - Nitra Proc.

OrdolffTable 1. Results of session one.Quarter Hind left Hind right Front left Front rightMilking time (min) 5.3 5.3 5.3 4.4Aver. milk flow (kg/min) 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.7Peak milk flow (kg/min) 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.8Overmilking (min) 1.08 0.96 1.57 0.44Flow at take off (kg/min) 0.07 0.12 0.07 0.18Stripping yield (g) 59.3 64.6 20.3 28.4Table 2. Results of session two.Quarter Hind left Hind right Front left Front rightMilking time (min) 6.4 7.2 3.9 3.8Aver. milk flow (kg/min) 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6Peak milk flow (kg/min) 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.8Overmilking (min) 0.16 0.11 0.17 0.37Flow at take off (kg/min) 0.22 0.24 0.28 0.16Stripping yield (g) 44.5 67.7 42.6 42.8In session 2 the average milk yield was 12.2 kg per milking. The levels ofaverage milk flow and of peakflow per quarter had increased and weremore uniform over quarters (Table 2). In most quarters the time recordedfor overmilking was considerably reduced, only quarter “front right” didnot show much difference to session 1. “Flow at take off” and “Strippingyield” were higher than in session 1, but more uniform and still atacceptable levels.The results obtained indicated that milkmeters with an appropriatesensitivity for low rates of milk flow may be helpful for evaluation andadjustment of milking behaviour of AMS. However, to do this efficientlythe manufacturer of the AMS should define suitable procedures.Umstätter, C. & Kaufmann, O. (2001). The importance of processcontrol in relation to udder quarters in milk production. Proc.5 th Conference: Construction, Engineering and Environment in LivestockFarming, 6.-7.3.2001, Stuttgart-Hohenheim (D), 230-235ReferencesWeiss, D. and Worstorff, H. (2000): Effects of quarter take-off withand without machine stripping under simulated automatic milkingconditions. Proc. Int Symp. Robotic Milking, 17.-19. 8. 2000, Lelystad (NL),68 – 69ICAR Technical Series - No 7173