University of Kentucky - Department of Biosystems &
Agricultural Engineering
Geotextile Feeding/Traffic Surfaces and Costs
by Larry W. Turner, Extension Agricultural Engineer
Mud robs Kentucky beef and
dairy producers of performance from their cattle herds in winter and spring
conditions. To help avoid the problems associated with mud and reduced
performance, concrete pads or lower-cost all-weather surfaces should be used
wherever animals congregate--- feeding areas, animal traffic areas and loafing
areas. Although concrete is probably the most desirable surface for durability
and low maintenance, an all-weather surface can be constructed of geotextile
fabric, rock and fine surface cover for less than 1/3 of the cost of concrete.
Rock over bare soil in Kentucky requires approximately 12" of depth for
stability. In contrast, by using geotextile fabrics, rock depth can be cut in
half and the rock stays in place, cutting down on repeated maintenance.
Floor or Pad
Construction
Geotextile fabrics are basically of two types--- a "geotextile"
fabric material, or a plastic-derivative cross-hatched "snow fence"
type grid material. Both are used in the highway industry to support rock bases
for roadbeds and to distribute the loads of vehicle traffic. Figure 1 illustrates
the recommended construction details for animal-use pads.
The filter fabrics are
porous, so water and moisture are passed through the material while the rock is
held in place. Even with mud and manure buildup on the surface, the animals
have a solid footing so that they do not sink in mud. In Kentucky, our
recommendations are for a 4-6 in layer of No. 4 crushed limestone rock for the
base material. A 2-3 in cover of sifted lime or "dense grade"
(sometimes called "road mix") material will allow for easier scraping
of the surface and less loss of rock through the box manure spreader. The use
of the finer aggregate for surface cover also improves animal comfort/welfare
and reduces potential foot injuries as compared to crushed rock. A sand surface
was also tested, but the sand tended to shift easily and did not provide as
firm a footing. The dense grade material is generally available from suppliers
of highway surface material, and is typically composed of aggregate no larger
than 0.75 in, with mostly finer aggregate and fines. The lime surface should be
sifted so that it will not have a large portion of fines. Some fines are
desirable for packing and stability, however.
On-farm trials and a trial installation on our University of Kentucky Woodford
Co. Beef unit have been very successful in illustrating the effectiveness and
durability of geotextile and rock pads. An Extension publication (AEU-68)
developed by the Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering Department at the
University of Kentucky provides additional construction information and a list
of suppliers of the geotextile fabric materials (Turner, 1996; supplier listing
available via web site).
Costs
As shown in Table 1 below, the cost of geotextile pads is about $0.49/ft2,
while concrete costs in the range of $1.50/ft2. Rock over bare soil
in Kentucky requires approximately 12" of depth for stability. In
contrast, by using geotextile fabrics, rock depth can be cut in half and the
rock stays in place, cutting down on the repeated maintenance usually required
for rock pads.
Facility Layout
Width, slope and drainage.
Feeding pads should be 10-12 ft wide next to a bunk as a minimum depending upon
the size of animals. Slopes should be 3/4-1 in per ft. away from the feed bunk.
The location of the bunk and pad should be a generally well drained area that
offers good drainage away from the site, and an area where excess manure
buildup can be stored if the pad is not scraped daily. For traffic surfaces,
widths should be 8-12 ft. Traffic lanes should be slightly crowned in the
center of the traffic lane.
Layouts. Figures 2-4 present
typical layouts for feeding pads and facilities for cattle using geotextile
pads. These installations will improve animal performance, while reducing
erosion and runoff from feeding sites.
References
Turner, L.W. 1996.
"Reducing Mud Using Highway-Type Filter Materials", AEU-68,
Department of Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering, Cooperative Extension
Service, College of Agriculture, University of Kentucky, Lexington.
"All Weather Geotextile Surfaces for Livestock and Vehicle Areas";
VAE-1051; Length- 11:06. Cooperative Extension Video, available from the
University of Kentucky Cooperative Extension Service, Department of
Agricultural Communications Services.
Turner, L.W. 1997. Listing of Geotextile Fabric Sources. Biosystems and
Agricultural Engineering Web Site - (http://www.bae.uky.edu/). Under
"Departmental Research and Extension Information/Resources". April.
UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY, KENTUCKY STATE UNIVERSITY, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, AND KENTUCKYKY COUNTIES, COOPERATING
Last updated July 27,
1997
