International Journal of Biometeorology

, Volume 62, Issue 5, pp 773–781 | Cite as

PID temperature controller in pig nursery: spatial characterization of thermal environment

  • Juliana de Souza Granja Barros
  • Luiz Antonio Rossi
  • Zigomar Menezes de Souza
Original Paper


The use of enhanced technologies of temperature control can improve the thermal conditions in environments of livestock facilities. The objective of this study was to evaluate the spatial distribution of the thermal environment variables in a pig nursery with a heating system with two temperature control technologies based on the geostatistical analysis. The following systems were evaluated: overhead electrical resistance with Proportional, Integral, and Derivative (PID) controller and overhead electrical resistance with a thermostat. We evaluated the climatic variables: dry bulb temperature (Tbs), air relative humidity (RH), temperature and humidity index (THI), and enthalpy in the winter, at 7:00, 12:00, and 18:00 h. The spatial distribution of these variables was mapped by kriging. The results showed that the resistance heating system with PID controllers improved the thermal comfort conditions in the pig nursery in the coldest hours, maintaining the spatial distribution of the air temperature more homogeneous in the pen. During the hottest weather, neither system provided comfort.


Animal ambiance Geostatistics Spatial variability Weaned piglets 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed.


  1. Barros JSG, Rossi LA, Sartor K (2016) PID temperature controller in pig nursery: improvements in performance, thermal comfort, and electricity use. Int J Biometeorol 60(8):1271–1277. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bournet PE, Boulard T (2010) Effect of ventilator configuration on the distributed climate of greenhouses: a review of experimental and CFD studies. Comp Elect Agric 74(2):195–217. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cambardella et al (1994) Field scale variability of soil properties in Central IOWA soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 58(5):1501–1511.
  4. Campos JA et al (2008) Thermal environment and swine performance in two models of maternity and nursery. R Ceres 55:187–193Google Scholar
  5. Carvalho TM et al (2012) Use of geostatistics on broiler production for evaluation of different minimum ventilation systems during brooding phase. R Bras Zootec 41(1):194–202. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Daskalov PI, Arvanitis KG, Pasgianos GD, Sigrimis NA (2006) Non-linear adaptive temperature and humidity control in animal buildings. Biosyst Eng 93(1):1–24. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Faria FF, Moura DJ, Souza ZM, Matarazzo SV (2008) Climatic spatial variability of a dairy freepen barn. Cienc Rural 38(9):2498–2505. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ferreira RA (2011) Maior produção com melhor ambiente para aves, suínos e bovinos, 2nd edn. Aprenda Fácil, ViçosaGoogle Scholar
  9. Isaaks EH, Srivastava RM (1989) An introduction to applied geostatistics. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Kummer R et al (2009) Factors associated with nursery pig performance. Acta Scient Vet 37(Supl 1):195–209Google Scholar
  11. Laine TM, Lyytikäinen T, Yliaho M, Anttila M (2008) Risk factors for post-weaning diarrhea on piglet producing farms in Finland. Acta Vet Scand 50(1):1–11. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Little TM, Hills FJ (1978) Agricultural experimentation: design and analysis. John Wiley & Sons, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Miles DM, Rowe DE, Owes PR (2008) Winter broiler litter gases and nitrogen compounds: temporal and spatial trends. Atmo Env 42(14):3351–3363. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Moura DJ (1999) Ventilação na suinocultura. In: SILVA IJO (ed) Ambiência e qualidade na produção industrial de suínos. FEALQ, Piracicaba, pp 49–179Google Scholar
  15. Nazareno AC, Silva IJO, Vieira FMC, Camargo JR, Medeiros SRR (2013) Characterization of microclimate in different layout of boxes during transport of fertile eggs. R Bras Eng Agric Ambient 17(3):327–332. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ogata K (2011) Engenharia de controle moderno, 5th edn. PEARSON, São PauloGoogle Scholar
  17. Pandorfi H, Silva IJO, Guiselini C, Piedade SMS (2007) The use of fuzzy logic for the productive environment characterization for pregnant sows. Eng Agríc 27(1):83–92. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Pandorfi H, Silva IJO, Moura DJ, Sevegnani KB (2005) Microclimate of creep for piglets submitted to different systems of heating during the winter period. R Bras Eng Agríc Ambient 9(1):99–106. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pandorfi H, Silva IJO, Moura DJ, Sevegnani KB (2004) Analysis of image applied to the study of the behaviour of piglets in the creep. Eng Agríc 24(2):274–284. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ponciano PF, Yanagi Junior T, Ferraz GAES, Scalon JD, Schiassi L (2013) Spatial variability of air dry bulb temperature and black globe humidity index in a broiler house during the heating phase. Eng Agríc 33(3):432–444. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rodrigues VC, da Silva IJO, Vieira FMC, Nascimento ST (2010) A correct enthalpy relationship as thermal comfort index for livestock. Int J Biometeorol 55(3):455–459. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sales FAL, Barbosa Filho JAD, Aquino TMF, Brito IF, Carvalho LE (2011) Environmental monitoring of the horizontal profile of housing system for pregnant sows, using precision livestock production. R Cient Prod Anim 13(1):7–12.
  23. Sampaio CAP, Cristani J, Dubiela JA, Boff CE, Oliveira MA (2004) Evaluation of the thermal environment in growing and finishing swine housing using thermal comfort indexes under tropical conditions. Cienc Rural 34(3):785–790. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sarubbi J, Rossi LA, Moura DJ, Oliveira RA, David E (2010) Electrical energy use in different heating systems for weaned piglets. Eng Agríc 30(6):1003–1011.
  25. Silva CA, Brito BG, Mores N, Amaral AL (1998) The relation of the risk factors on the suckling piglets performance in farms of north Paraná state. Cienc Rural 28(4):677–681.
  26. Silva IM, Pandorfi H, Almeida GLP, Guiselini C, Caldas AM, Jacob LA (2012) Spatial analysis of thermal conditions of the pre-milking dairy cattle under climatization regimes. R Bras Eng Agríc Ambient 16(8):903–909.
  27. Soldatos AG, Arvanitis KG, Daskalov PI, Pasgianos GD, Sigrimis NA (2005) Nonlinear robust temperature-humidity control in livestock buildings. Comp Elect Agric 49(3):357–376. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Vieira SR (2000) Geoestatística em estudos de variabilidade espacial do solo. In: Novais RF, Alvares VH, Schaefer CEGR (eds) Tópicos em ciência do solo. Sociedade Brasileira de Ciência do Solo,Viçosa, pp 1–53Google Scholar
  29. Warrick AW, Nielsen DR (1980) Spatial variability of soil physical properties in the field. In: Hillel D (ed) Applications of soil physics. Academic Press, New York, pp 319–344. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Yanagi Júnior TY et al (2011) Spatial characterization of thermoacoustic and luminance environment in commercial broiler chicken house. Eng Agríc 31(1):1–12. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ISB 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Campinas, UNICAMP, School of Agricultural EngineeringCampinasBrazil

Personalised recommendations