Comparative Evaluation of Cooling Systems for Farrowing Sows

Thumbnail Image
Dong, Hongmin
Tao, Xiuping
Li, Yue
Liu, Jintian
Major Professor
Committee Member
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Xin, Hongwei
Distinguished Professor Emeritus
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Organizational Unit
Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering

Since 1905, the Department of Agricultural Engineering, now the Department of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering (ABE), has been a leader in providing engineering solutions to agricultural problems in the United States and the world. The department’s original mission was to mechanize agriculture. That mission has evolved to encompass a global view of the entire food production system–the wise management of natural resources in the production, processing, storage, handling, and use of food fiber and other biological products.

In 1905 Agricultural Engineering was recognized as a subdivision of the Department of Agronomy, and in 1907 it was recognized as a unique department. It was renamed the Department of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering in 1990. The department merged with the Department of Industrial Education and Technology in 2004.

Dates of Existence

Historical Names

  • Department of Agricultural Engineering (1907–1990)

Related Units

Journal Issue
Is Version Of

The field studies reported here compare the performance of three cooling systems for relieving farrowing/lactating sows of heat stress under the warm and humid production climate in southern China. The comparative systems included (1) tunnel ventilation (TV) with vertical head-zone ventilation (HZV) vs. TV with HZV and drip cooling (DC), (2) TV only vs. TV with DC, and (3) horizontal air mixing (HAM) only vs. HAM and DC. For the HZV, a perforated overhead air duct was used to create an air velocity of 0.6 to 0.8 m/s (118 to 157 ft/min) in the head zone of the sow. The paired tests were conducted successively in an experimental commercial farrowing barn housing 42 sows. Body temperature (Tb) and respiration rate (RR) of the sows were used to evaluate the efficacy of the systems. The results indicate that sows under TV + DC or TV + HZV + DC had significantly lower Tb than those under TV only or TV + HZV (P < 0.01 and P < 0.001, respectively). DC under HAM was less effective for Tb reduction (P > 0.05). DC reduced RR in all cases, 42% under TV (P < 0.01), 41% under TV + HZV (P < 0.01), and 22% under HAM (P > 0.05). It was concluded that TV with DC provides the most cost-effective cooling scheme.


This article is from Applied Engineering in Agriculture 17, no. 1 (2001): 91–96.

Mon Jan 01 00:00:00 UTC 2001