• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Blending grain

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Not funny farmaholic but you’ve reminded me of my dear ole dad who I worked side by side for 21 yrs.

    If live give you lemons make lemonade well he used to say foook that just learn to stomach efffing lemons

    My next comment I think is BS but I’ve been told by many that wheat which fails falling numbers store it and sell it in 3 months time bear in mind it’s 35 to 40 c after our harvest.

    But as I said it probably bs.

    Elevators don’t run averages for falling numbers which is basically blending by elevator? Meaning average for fn is x below parameters and you bring your load in which is over for fn but when blended it’s ok because average is lower? Never affects guys who have good fn.

    Starting to think your elevators make life hard for ya in Canada. Opposite here as so many new port facilities going up the big boys have to play the game. Lot o new one grower owned storage only basically.

    Bad old days of single desk we had what we called cliff faced pricing and grades.
    They wonder why they lost it.

    Modern marketers/graincos here bust there boilers nowadays

    Comment


      #17
      Originally posted by Ache4Acres View Post
      Link to a demo of a falling number test being performed. There must be an easier way - this seems quite labor intensive and a bit less than scientific

      https://bakerpedia.com/processes/falling-number-test/ https://bakerpedia.com/processes/falling-number-test/
      What do you expect it to be to be considered scientific?

      It is a time consuming process that can really back up a delivery line if an elevator is doing every truck. The fact you want it to take more than 300 seconds to fall means you want it to take at least 5 minutes in that one machine, not including prep time. You want a quicker falling number then grow sprouted wheat I guess hah

      Some day they’ll probably develop some other way to measure the enzymes but for now that’s the standard.

      Comment


        #18
        Originally posted by Blaithin View Post
        What are you considering a reasonable falling number in sprouted wheat?

        FN is hard to blend. It’s not like protein or moisture where you can average between them and get a good blend. It’s more likely sprouted wheat will just bring down a good falling number if blended. It’s a very erratic, unpredictable and not usually helpful process. It’s part of the reason terminals are anal retentive when they know it’s a low FN, they could potentially lose a large bin of good wheat by just adding some sprouted in. Kind of like sticking some heated canola in, do it badly and you can lose a lot of good 1can to heated.
        We try to grow wheat varieties with a 'G' or 'VG' resistance to sprouting. [Check Prov. variety rating charts] The Falling Numbers are rated on each variety as well, Brandon the Low with poor sprouting resistance 317, and Unity a "VG" with a FN of 415. Our local Paterson Grain checks all the FN's... on site... takes less than 20 minutes for the results. 300 minimum... like FN over 330... so diminished likelihood of a poor FN spot in load wrecking the lot is diminished. Swathing wheat in Sept that gets rained on... is also FN killer. It rains here every day... cold temps help preserve the FN.

        Comment


          #19
          So has there been any falling number test results come back yet? I may send the next harvest sample away now because the rest of the wheat out there will be different again.

          The first two came back a #1 even though a GrainCo thinks it's a 1 and 2. Anything before the shit weather started will be gold! DESPITE ANY MINOR IMPERFECTION CAUSED BY THE MYRIAD OF GRADING DEMERITS AT THEIR DISPOSAL IN THE ARSENAL SANCTIONED BY THE CGC.

          Comment


            #20
            Originally posted by TOM4CWB View Post
            We try to grow wheat varieties with a 'G' or 'VG' resistance to sprouting. [Check Prov. variety rating charts] The Falling Numbers are rated on each variety as well, Brandon the Low with poor sprouting resistance 317, and Unity a "VG" with a FN of 415. Our local Paterson Grain checks all the FN's... on site... takes less than 20 minutes for the results. 300 minimum... like FN over 330... so diminished likelihood of a poor FN spot in load wrecking the lot is diminished. Swathing wheat in Sept that gets rained on... is also FN killer. It rains here every day... cold temps help preserve the FN.
            In "hindsight" we made a poor management decision to swath because we had a viable workable straight cutting option. No coulda woulda shoulda because I don't need glasses for 20/20 hindsight vision. Made the decision, now live with it!

            Comment


              #21
              Originally posted by farmaholic View Post
              So has there been any falling number test results come back yet? I may send the next harvest sample away now because the rest of the wheat out there will be different again.

              The first two came back a #1 even though a GrainCo thinks it's a 1 and 2. Anything before the shit weather started will be gold! DESPITE ANY MINOR IMPERFECTION CAUSED BY THE MYRIAD OF GRADING DEMERITS AT THEIR DISPOSAL IN THE ARSENAL SANCTIONED BY THE CGC.
              Our AAC Connery went through the snow last year, was over 320 FN... This year a #2 so far.

              Comment


                #22
                Originally posted by TOM4CWB View Post
                Our AAC Connery went through the snow last year, was over 320 FN... This year a #2 so far.
                We have Landmark this year.
                Eyeing Alida next.

                Comment


                  #23
                  Originally posted by farmaholic View Post
                  So has there been any falling number test results come back yet? I may send the next harvest sample away now because the rest of the wheat out there will be different again.

                  The first two came back a #1 even though a GrainCo thinks it's a 1 and 2. Anything before the shit weather started will be gold! DESPITE ANY MINOR IMPERFECTION CAUSED BY THE MYRIAD OF GRADING DEMERITS AT THEIR DISPOSAL IN THE ARSENAL SANCTIONED BY THE CGC.
                  Everything I’ve seen/heard of is over 300 with the exception of one sprouted sample. Most seem to be hanging out in the 330 area.

                  I have heard up near Edmonton and towards North Battleford they’re experiencing a lot of variation even in the same field. They’re wetter than us so I’m assuming it’s starting to sprout.

                  Comment


                    #24
                    Originally posted by Blaithin View Post
                    Everything I’ve seen/heard of is over 300 with the exception of one sprouted sample. Most seem to be hanging out in the 330 area.

                    I have heard up near Edmonton and towards North Battleford they’re experiencing a lot of variation even in the same field. They’re wetter than us so I’m assuming it’s starting to sprout.
                    Last CGC harvest sample results were >360 from the samples we sent. Why "greater than", did someone not let it finish? I understand those samples are not "official" grades but if you're going to do the test, reveal the exact results!

                    Comment


                      #25
                      Originally posted by farmaholic View Post
                      Last CGC harvest sample results were >360 from the samples we sent. Why "greater than", did someone not let it finish? I understand those samples are not "official" grades but if you're going to do the test, reveal the exact results!
                      My understanding is the higher the results get the less precise they can be. Not that 400 means it’s really a 300, just that it’s less accurate. And yes, probably something to do with time. If you have 500 samples to do in a day why wait over 6 minutes for each to fall if you just need to know they’re over a certain point.

                      Since so many terminals are installing the set ups now, take a bin sample in and get them to show you. Then you’ll see the process and have a more exact idea?

                      Comment


                        #26
                        Originally posted by Blaithin View Post
                        My understanding is the higher the results get the less precise they can be. Not that 400 means it’s really a 300, just that it’s less accurate. And yes, probably something to do with time. If you have 500 samples to do in a day why wait over 6 minutes for each to fall if you just need to know they’re over a certain point.

                        Since so many terminals are installing the set ups now, take a bin sample in and get them to show you. Then you’ll see the process and have a more exact idea?
                        Thanks Blaithin, but I already had a pretty good idea what the process entailed and Ache4acres posted a real good video link.

                        Comment

                        • Reply to this Thread
                        • Return to Topic List
                        Working...