# Hay storage flooring alternative



## thebonepile (Sep 18, 2009)

I was wanting to post this to the replies about shed floor paving but keep forgetting.....then I got to thinking, it would also be good for outside hay storage - just use clean materials, pea rock or just a little larger would be about ideal I would think. I don't work for or know anything about this stuff, but I do know what it would take to make a good draining hay storage area and I think this might be worth a shot.....what do you think?

PolyPavement: Natural Soil Pavement - Liquid Soil Solidifier


----------



## Haymike56 (May 3, 2010)

I store my round bales outside under Hay Tarps. I put dow a layer of 3/4" clean limestone and stack the bales on that. They will store all winter like that and the only time i have a problem is if i have a thin spot in the gravel. You have to use "clean" rock any amont of fines will wick the moisture up to the bales. I tried using asphalt grindings but that has too many fines. Tried storing small squares like this but the finicky customers dont like the light dust on the bottom bales. this year I am switching to wood pallets on some of the squares to see how that works.


----------



## Hayboy1 (Jul 19, 2008)

I am kind of liking this idea. Correct me if I am wrong here, but I have a 40x100 Quanset with a sand subfloor with 8-10" of "crusher dust" by-product of lime quarry which pack real hard, but does not prevent water coming through from underneath. If my figures are correct, somewhere between $5-600 would do the job? I think that is worth it for me, but again please correct me if I am wrong on my math.


----------



## thebonepile (Sep 18, 2009)

Don't get me wrong. I am no expert here. But I strolled across the poly stuff and as a Civil Engineer doing a project for some sensitive ideas - just stored it away in the back of my mind.

I haven't used the stuff, or even seen it used, but I do believe it will do what they say. (the military using the stuff helps) (probably doesn't help the price though)

think of the stuff as glue. The smaller particles you glue together (sand) the more glue you will need, but the smoother the finish will be. So, with that theory, the bigger the particles are , the less glue you will need to keep them together....and for hay storage, you want large voids to keep water from wicking up. Ideally in my mind pea size gravel or just a little bigger would be about perfect.


----------



## thebonepile (Sep 18, 2009)

after rereading your reply, this is something to consider. A lot of these projects basically use this stuff and native products to do a complete top to bottom project (like the airport runways) If you have already done a portion of the job (the hard load supporting subbase) all you need to add is the anti water seeping top layer that has a lot of voids. With pea gravel type stuff (maybe a large washed sand would be a lot cheaper) maybe an 1" or 2 is all you need of this stuff. I do hope this helps someone and someone tries it and has good luck.


----------



## vhaby (Dec 30, 2009)

Purdue University conducted a study of round bales that were stored inside, outside on the ground or outside on crushed rocks:
• The bale stored inside retained 92 percent of its original weight.
• The bale stored outside on the ground retained only 76 percent of its original weight.
• The bale stored outside on crushed rock retained 85 percent of its original weight.

Storing bales on crushed rock outside helps prevent loss. Would storing bales inside on coarse-crushed limestone rock save an additional 8% that was lost on bales stored inside? The study didn't say, but probably did not account for stacking bales three high inside...so even less than 8% would be lost on inside stored bales stacked three high without a rock base.


----------



## rank (Apr 15, 2009)

vhaby said:


> Purdue University conducted a study of round bales that were stored inside, outside on the ground or outside on crushed rocks:
> • The bale stored inside retained 92 percent of its original weight.
> • The bale stored outside on the ground retained only 76 percent of its original weight.
> • The bale stored outside on crushed rock retained 85 percent of its original weight.
> ...


Interesting. Was this weight loss dry matter only I assume? How did they measure it? Got a link to the study?

thanks


----------



## vhaby (Dec 30, 2009)

Wish I had a link to the round bale study from Purdue, but I found this information in a hay production publication put out by the Texas AgriLife Extension Service several years ago.


----------

