1.8–2.2 T/H Hammer Mill for Beef Cattle Hay in Argentina

The manager decided to install a dedicated hammer mill for beef cattle hay rather than invest immediately in a complete feed processing line. After discussing the differences between leafy alfalfa and stemmier grass, the customer selected the RICHI SFSP66×80 hammer mill with a 75 kW main motor. The order included 6 mm, 8 mm and 10 mm screens, allowing the farm to test different particle sizes and establish a practical setting for each forage.

One Grinder for Two Different Forage Materials

Alfalfa and Rhodes grass behave differently during grinding. Alfalfa contains relatively delicate leaves and stems, so it can be reduced in size quickly but may generate fine particles if processed too aggressively. Rhodes grass has tougher, more fibrous stems that generally require more grinding work to achieve a similar size distribution.

The customer wanted one machine capable of processing both materials without maintaining separate grinding equipment. The important selection criteria were therefore not just nominal capacity, but also the ability to change screens, maintain a consistent feed supply and collect dust from dry forage.

The SFSP66×80 Grass Crusher Machine was selected to handle the farm's planned grinding volume of approximately 3,000 tonnes of hay per year. Its 660 mm rotor and 800 mm crushing chamber provided the working capacity required for the project, while interchangeable screens allowed the operator to adjust the process to suit the incoming material.

SFSP66×80 Hammer Mill Specifications

The stated production rates are based on the reported project trials. Actual capacity depends on forage moisture, stem thickness, feeding consistency, screen condition and the desired particle-size distribution. A 75 kW motor also requires an appropriately sized electrical supply and motor protection, with the final installation designed around the farm's local power infrastructure.

Why the 8 mm Screen Became the Preferred Setting

Rather than selecting a screen based on assumptions alone, the customer tested all three supplied options on both types of hay. The results showed that the finest screen was not automatically the best choice. For this farm, the objective was to reduce sorting and feed refusal without unnecessarily increasing grinding time or generating excessive fines.

Alfalfa hay

• 10 mm screen: Throughput was approximately 2.5 T/H. Around 75% of the measured particles fell between 2 mm and 10 mm, while some larger pieces remained. The manager estimated that feed waste declined to approximately 8%.
• 8 mm screen: Throughput was approximately 2.2 T/H, with around 85% of particles between 1.5 mm and 8 mm. The manager selected this setting because cattle consumed the resulting material more consistently.
• 6 mm screen: Throughput fell to approximately 1.8 T/H, with more fine material being generated. The additional reduction in size was not considered necessary for the farm's feeding objectives.

Rhodes grass

• 10 mm screen: Throughput was approximately 2.2 T/H. Some thick stem pieces remained, and the measured particle distribution was less consistent than with alfalfa.
• 8 mm screen: Throughput was approximately 1.9 T/H, with around 85% of particles between 1.5 mm and 8 mm. This setting provided the preferred balance between processing speed and feed acceptance.
• 6 mm screen: Throughput dropped to approximately 1.5 T/H, making it less attractive for routine production when the finer grind was not required.

The 8 mm screen became the farm's standard starting point for both materials. The manager could still switch to 10 mm when processing conditions or the intended ration justified a coarser grind, rather than treating one setting as suitable for every batch.

How the Ground Hay Fits into the Feeding Program

The hammer mill prepares forage for mixing; it does not formulate a complete cattle ration by itself. After grinding, the hay can be combined with grain, protein ingredients and mineral supplements according to the animals' production stage and the nutritionist's recommendations.

One forage-rich ration used as a project reference contained the following ingredients:

• 40% ground alfalfa hay.
• 20% ground Rhodes grass.
• 20% ground corn grain.
• 15% wet distillers' grains.
• 5% minerals and molasses.

This is an illustrative ration for the operation, not a universal finishing formula. A diet containing 60% forage may suit particular growing or backgrounding objectives, but a high-concentrate finishing ration would normally require a different balance. Actual proportions must be adjusted for forage analysis, moisture, energy and protein requirements, mineral levels and cattle performance targets.

Grinding makes the forage easier to incorporate into a mixed ration and can help reduce selective feeding when particle size is properly controlled. However, the material should not be ground finer than necessary. Beef cattle still need adequate effective fiber to support rumination and normal rumen function, so particle size must be considered alongside the complete diet.

Dust Collection and Safe Material Handling

Dry hay generates airborne fines during hammer milling, particularly when leafy alfalfa is processed. The supplied system therefore included a cyclone and fabric filter bag to separate the ground material from the conveying air and reduce dust escaping into the work area.

During operation, the customer found that alfalfa produced more troublesome dust than Rhodes grass. An additional filter bag was subsequently introduced to improve dust collection. This experience reinforced the importance of sizing the extraction system for the actual material and throughput, rather than treating dust collection as an accessory to be considered after installation.

The farm also found that wire from baling operations could enter the grinder with the hay. A magnetic grate and appropriate foreign-object inspection were important safeguards. Before grinding, operators need to check bales for wire, twine, stones and other contaminants, and the equipment must be isolated before clearing blockages or carrying out maintenance. Dry forage dust also requires suitable housekeeping and combustible-dust risk controls.

Installation and Delivery to Argentina

The hammer mill was shipped from Qingdao, China, to the Port of Buenos Aires, followed by inland transport to the customer's facility. The reported sea transit was approximately 35 days, with the complete delivery process taking around 42 days, depending on shipping and customs arrangements.

Before installation, the customer needed to prepare a suitable foundation, electrical connection, material-feeding arrangement and discharge route. Space also had to be reserved for the cyclone, filter bag and maintenance access. The exact footprint depends on the final layout, particularly whether hay is fed manually, through a bale-breaking arrangement or by a mechanical conveyor.

For a single-machine installation, the main motor's 75 kW rating is only one part of the utility calculation. The farm also needed to account for auxiliary equipment, dust extraction, motor starting current and local electrical protection. A trained operator can supervise normal grinding, while additional help may be needed for bale handling and moving finished material if these tasks are not mechanized.

Operating Experience After Ten Months

After approximately ten months of operation, the feedlot manager reported that the machine had accumulated around 1,500 operating hours. Alfalfa continued to grind faster than Rhodes grass, consistent with the initial tests. The farm used the 8 mm screen for routine production and retained the other screens for situations in which a different particle size was needed.

The first set of hammers was turned to use the unworn side after approximately 700 hours. The original 8 mm screen remained in service at the time of the reported follow-up. These intervals are specific to the customer's materials and operating conditions; inspection and replacement should be based on wear, vibration, output and particle-size checks rather than a fixed schedule alone.

The manager also reported that the forage-related waste rate fell from approximately 20–25% with long hay to below 5% after the feeding method changed. This was an operational estimate, not a guaranteed outcome of the grinder itself. Actual feed refusal depends on ration composition, feeding management, trough design, animal behavior and the quality of the ground material.

The customer considered the improvement worthwhile because it made better use of home-grown forage and reduced the amount of material left uneaten. For an operation processing thousands of tonnes of hay annually, even a modest reduction in avoidable losses can have a meaningful effect on feed costs.

Technical Support for a Single-Machine Purchase

Before the order was placed, RICHI reviewed the two forage types and recommended testing 6 mm, 8 mm and 10 mm screens. The customer supplied representative hay samples for grinding trials, allowing the team to compare throughput and particle size before settling on the preferred configuration.

The project also included a Spanish-language operation manual, guidance on screen selection and recommendations for handling dusty forage. The customer was able to add the hammer mill to its existing feeding operation without purchasing a complete feed production line.

This approach is useful for beef farms and feedlots that already have forage storage, mixing equipment or other feed-handling infrastructure. The key is to identify the process bottleneck and choose a machine that addresses it without creating unnecessary downstream capacity or utility requirements.

Choosing a Hammer Mill for Beef Cattle Hay

For Argentine cattle producers processing alfalfa, Rhodes grass or other dry forage, machine selection should begin with a representative material sample and a realistic hourly production target. Leafy hay and stem-heavy grass can produce different throughputs even when processed using the same motor and screen.

The SFSP66×80 was selected for this project because its capacity, interchangeable screens and dust-collection arrangement suited the farm's forage preparation requirements. The 8 mm screen became the preferred setting after testing, but the results should be verified for each new forage type and moisture condition.

RICHI Machinery supplies hammer mills and other feed processing equipment for farms and commercial feed operations. If you are planning to grind hay for beef cattle, provide your forage type, moisture content, required particle size and hourly output. These details help determine the appropriate machine configuration and whether additional bale breaking, conveying or dust-control equipment is required.