Engineering, Energy, Transport AIC

Ihor KUPCHUK – Candidate of Technical Sciences, Associate professor, Associate Professor of the Department of Engineering Mechanics and Technological Processes in the Agricultural Industry, Faculty of Engineering and Technology, Vinnytsia National Agrarian University (3, Sonychna St., Vinnytsia, 21008, Ukraine, e-mail: kupchuk.igor@i.ua; http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2973-6914).

The article examines the role of the feed-mixing process within the technological chain of feed preparation and its significance in ensuring the stable quality of feed mixtures and improving the energy efficiency of agricultural machinery. The purpose of the study is to provide a systematic generalization of the factors, methods, and criteria for evaluating the efficiency of the mixing process and to identify scientific and methodological gaps that limit further development of mixer designs and operating regimes. The research methodology combines system analysis, mechano-technological modeling, and a comparative-analytical approach to process evaluation. A comprehensive review of scientific and patent-technical sources was conducted, and current solutions in vertical mixer design and efficiency assessment methods were analyzed. A structural-logical model of the mixing process was developed, comprising three interrelated subsystems: material, energy, and informational. Within this model, three interaction levels were distinguished: input parameters (material properties), control influences (machine design and operating parameters), and process outcomes (quality and energy indicators). A classification of factors determining mixing efficiency was generalized into three groups – material, technological, and constructive – with indication of key parameters and influence criteria.
Methods for assessing mixing efficiency were analyzed, including physico-chemical, physico-mechanical, energetic, and digital (intelligent-modeling) approaches. Generalized quality and energy efficiency criteria were proposed. It was established that existing methods remain fragmented and fail to comprehensively account for the interaction within the “machine–material–process” system. The need for the development of mechano-technological models of mixing that consider the rheological properties of feed materials, parameters of working elements, and operational modes was substantiated. The potential of CFD and DEM numerical modeling, combined with Smart Feeding sensor systems, was emphasized as a tool for adaptive real-time process control.
The obtained results form the theoretical and methodological basis for further research aimed at optimizing mixer designs, reducing specific energy consumption, and improving the stability of feed mixture quality under industrial conditions.

1.    FAO & IFIF. (2020). Good practices for the feed sector: Implementing the Codex Alimentarius code of practice on good animal feeding (2nd ed.). FAO. [in English].
2.    Schingoethe, D. J. (2017). A 100-year review: Total mixed ration feeding of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science, 100(12), 10143–10150. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2017-13249 [in English].
3.    Costa, A., Agazzi, A., Perricone, V., Savoini, G., & Tangorra, F. M. (2019). Influence of different loading levels, cutting and mixing times on TMR homogeneity in a vertical mixer. Italian Journal of Animal Science, 18(1), 1093–1098. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1828051X.2019.1618742 [in English].
4.    Groesbeck, C. N., et al. (2007). Diet mixing time affects nursery pig performance. Journal of Animal Science, 85(7), 1793–1798. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2007-0019 [in English].
5.    Kansas State University. (2019). Quality feed manufacturing guide: Batching and mixing. K-State. [in English].
6.    Baumgartner, A., Mayer, D., & Schick, M. (2021). Energy efficiency and mixing uniformity in livestock feed preparation. Agricultural Engineering International: CIGR Journal, 23(4), 77–85. [in English].
7.    Bach, A., Sola, A., & Cabrera, E. (2023). Precision while mixing total mixed rations and its impact on feed composition and animal performance. JDS Communications, 4(4), 235–242. [in English].
8.    Muzzio, F. J., Shinbrot, T., & Glasser, B. J. (2002). Powder technology and mixing dynamics. Powder Technology, 124(3), 1–10. [in English].
9.    Bridgwater, J. (2010). Mixing of powders and granular materials. Particuology, 8(6), 563–567. [in English].
10.    Muzzio, D. (2000). Characterization of mixing processes in powder systems. Chemical Engineering Science, 55(20), 4409–4420. [in English].
11.    Zhang, H., Liu, X., & Li, W. (2020). Rheological behavior of silage and implications for mixer design. Biosystems Engineering, 197, 108–120. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2020.06.015 [in English].
12.    Wang, Z., Liu, Y., & Zhang, H. (2021). Viscoplastic flow modeling of wet feed mixtures. Journal of Food Engineering, 292, 110238. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2020.110238 [in English].
13.    Li, C., He, X., & Xu, Y. (2020). CFD simulation and optimization of feed mixing blades. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 175, 105624. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2020.105624 [in English].
14.    Tölgyesi, D., Bakonyi, S., Kiss, G., et al. (2023). Digitalization and smart technologies in animal nutrition systems. Sensors, 23(5), 2558. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/s23052558 [in English].
15.    Trioliet. (2025). Feed management / Weighing systems / TFM App / Cab Control. URL: https://www.trioliet.com/products/weighing-systems/feed-app-cab-control [in English].
16.    Jaylor. (2023). OrbitEvo intelligent controller and load sensing in TMR systems (Catalogue Rev-8). URL: https://jaylor.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/Rev-8-Catalogue-FINAL-compressed.pdf [in English].
17.    Tian, F., Zhang, H., Li, J., et al. (2020). Finite element simulation and performance test of loading and mixing characteristics of self-propelled TMR mixer. Advances in Materials Science and Engineering, Article 6875816. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/6875816 [in English].
18.    Buckmaster, D. R. (2014). Assessing uniformity of total mixed rations (Technical report). Purdue University. [in English].
19.    Escribà-Gelonch, M., Boix, J., & Llorens, E. (2024). Digital twins in agriculture: Applications and integration. Sensors, 24(8), 3562. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/s24083562 [in English].
20.    Tangorra, F. M., Buoio, E., Calcante, A., Bassi, A., & Costa, A. (2024). Internet of things (IoT): Sensors application in dairy cattle farming. Animals, 14(21), 3071. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14213071 [in English].