Produced by Bryan Ness, Pat McCoy and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was
produced from images generously made available by The
Internet Archive/American Libraries.)







TRANSCRIBER NOTES:

    Words in bold in the original are bracketed in equal signs
    (=).

    Words in italics in the original are bracketed by underscores
    (_).

    The tables have been modified to fit by creating a key for
    the first column. The key precedes the tables.

    Footnotes have been moved closer to the reference.

    Additional notes can be found at the end of the text.




  UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS

  Agricultural Experiment Station


  BULLETIN NO. 143


  ECONOMY OF THE ROUND
  DAIRY BARN


  BY WILBER J. FRASER


  [Illustration]


  URBANA, ILLINOIS, FEBRUARY, 1910




SUMMARY OF BULLETIN NO. 143


    1. Round barns would be more generally built if their
       advantages were known and if the few which have been
       erected had been rightly constructed.                    Page  1.

    2. The round dairy barn offers greater convenience in
       storing, handling and distributing the feed.             Page  5.

    3. In the circular construction, much greater strength is
       secured with less lumber.                                Page  6.

    4. The material for rectangular barns costs from 34 to 58
       percent more than for round barns of the same area and
       capacity.                                                Page  7.

    5. Round and rectangular barns compared.                    Page 11.

    6. Round and rectangular barns, including silos, compared.  Page 13.

    7. Detailed account, with illustrations showing how the
       round barn at the University was built.                  Page 17.

    8. Itemized statement of cost of a 60-foot round barn.      Page 29.

    9. Brief descriptions with illustrations and plans of
       several round dairy barns in actual use.                 Page 31.

   10. Conclusions. The advantages of the round dairy barn
       are convenience, strength and cheapness.                 Page 44.




ECONOMY OF THE ROUND DAIRY BARN

FULL SPECIFICATIONS AND DETAILED COST AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW
SIXTY-FOOT CIRCULAR DAIRY BARN AT THE UNIVERSITY. SAVING OF ROUND OVER
RECTANGULAR BARNS. NOTES ON SEVERAL ROUND BARNS ON DAIRY FARMS.[A]

    [A] Special acknowledgment is made to Mr. H. E. Crouch and
    Mr. R. E. Brand for their assistance in working out the
    detailed data which are the bases for the economic
    comparisons of the round and rectangular barns made in this
    bulletin.

BY W. J. FRASER, CHIEF IN DAIRY HUSBANDRY

    The planning, construction, and arrangement of farm buildings
    do not usually receive the thought and study these subjects
    warrant. How many dairymen have compared a circular, 40-cow
    barn with the common rectangular building containing the same
    area? How many understand that the circular structure is much
    the stronger; that the rectangular form requires 22 percent
    more wall and foundation to enclose the same space; and that
    the cost of material is from 34 to 58 percent more for the
    rectangular building?


In a community in which everyone is engaged in the same occupation, one
person is likely to copy from his neighbor without apparently giving a
thought as to whether or not there is a better way.

In a district of Kane county, Illinois, a certain type of dairy barn is
used by nearly everyone, while in the next county a distinctly different
type prevails, and the dairy barns of another adjacent county differ
from those of either of the former, simply because the early settlers of
this particular locality came from an eastern state and started building
the style of barn then common in Pennsylvania.

In a certain community in Ohio where a milk condensing factory is
located, a large number of farmers have barns 36 × 60 feet, with an "L"
the same size. The loft of the "L" is used for the storage of straw, and
the cows run loose in the lower portion. These barns are all built on
practically the same plan and are usually of the same size, and this is
the only community known to the writer where this form of barn is used
in this manner.

This tendency to imitate emphasizes the fact that men do not exercise
sufficient originality. Because most barns are rectangular is no reason
that this is the best and most economical form.




WHY MORE ROUND BARNS ARE NOT BUILT


[Illustration: FIG. 1. BARN NO. 5. 100 FEET IN DIAMETER, SCALE 20 FEET
TO ONE INCH; SHOWING INCREASED MOW CAPACITY GIVEN BY SELF-SUPPORTING
ROOF.]

In an early day when lumber was cheap, buildings were built of logs, or
at least had heavy frames. Under these conditions, the rectangular barn
was the one naturally used, and people have followed in the footsteps of
their forefathers in continuing this form of barn. The result is that
the economy and advantages of the round barn have apparently never been
considered. This is because they are not obvious at first sight, and
become fully apparent only after a detailed study of the construction.
For these reasons, the rectangular form still continues to be built,
altho it requires much more lumber. As the price of lumber has advanced
so materially in recent years, the possible saving in this material is a
large item, and well worth investigating.

The objections to round barns have usually been made by those who have
only a superficial knowledge of the subject, and do not really
understand the relative merits of the two forms. To the writer's
knowledge, there has never been published a carefully figured out,
detailed comparison of a properly constructed circular barn with the
rectangular barn.

The difficulty with most round barns that have been built, thus far, is
that they do not have a self-supporting roof, and consequently lose many
of the advantages of a properly constructed round barn. This is the
principal reason why round barns have not become more popular. A
straight roof necessarily requires many supports in the barn below.
These are both costly and inconvenient, and make the roof no stronger
than a dome-shaped, self-supporting roof which nearly doubles the
capacity of the mow. See Fig. (1).

Many who have thus disregarded capacity have also wasted lumber and made
a needless amount of work by chopping or hewing out the sill and plate,
thus requiring more labor and lumber, besides sacrificing the greater
strength of a built-up sill. Rightly constructed round barns are,
however, being built to a limited extent. One contractor has erected
twenty-four round barns, with self-supporting roofs, in the last nine
years. These barns vary in size from 40 feet in diameter with 18-foot
posts to 102 feet in diameter with 30-foot posts.

Another reason for the scarcity of round barns is the difficulty in
getting them built. Most carpenters hesitate to undertake the work
because in the erection of a round barn the construction should be
entirely different from that of the rectangular form. Many new problems
present themselves, but when these are once understood, the round barn
offers no more difficulties in construction than the rectangular form.
It is, however, important to have a head carpenter who is accustomed to
putting up round barns, as a man with ingenuity and experience can take
advantage of many opportunities to save labor and material.


KIND OF BARN NEEDED

The first thing to consider in the erection of a barn is a convenient
arrangement for the purpose for which it is to be used. At the
University of Illinois, two years ago, a twenty-acre demonstration dairy
farm was started, the sole object being to produce the largest amount of
milk per acre at the least possible cost. To meet the requirements of a
barn for this purpose, it became imperative to build one that was
convenient for feeding and caring for the cows, economical of
construction, and containing a large storage capacity in both silo and
mow. These are the requirements of a barn for every practical dairyman.

[Illustration: FIG. 2. FILLING THE SILO.]

A silo was needed that could be fed from the year round. With the small
number of cows kept, a deep enough layer of silage could not be fed off
each day to keep it good thru the summer, if the silo was more than 12
feet in diameter. As this small diameter was a necessity, it would
require two silos 33 feet deep to supply enough silage. Two silos of
such small diameter would not only be costly, but difficult to make
stand, unless built of concrete. This difficulty was overcome by using
the circular barn and placing in the center a silo which is 12 feet in
diameter and 54 feet deep, thus making the one silo, with as much
capacity as the two before mentioned, answer every purpose. This deep
silo is an important part of the round barn, as it not only forms a
support for the roof, but is protected by the barn, thus saving the cost
of siding. Then, too, besides occupying the space least valuable for
other purposes, it being centrally located, is in the most convenient
place for feeding. The silage chute being open at the top forms a
suction of air, which keeps the silage odor from the barn at milking
time, and also assists in ventilation when the door to the chute is
open.




ADVANTAGES OF THE ROUND BARN

    The points of superiority that the round dairy barn shows
    over the rectangular form are convenience, strength, and
    cheapness.


ROUND BARN MOST CONVENIENT

Considering that the barn on a dairy farm is used twice every day in the
year, and that for six months each year the cows occupy it almost
continuously, and that during this time a large amount of the labor of
the farm is done inside the barn, it is evident that the question of its
convenience is a vital one. The amount of time and strength wasted in
useless labor in poorly arranged buildings is appalling. People do not
stop to consider the saving in a year or a lifetime by having the barn
so conveniently arranged that there is a saving of only a few seconds on
each task that has to be done two or three times every day.

[Illustration: Fig. 3. INTERIOR OF BARN, SECOND FLOOR, SHOWING SILO AND
LOCATION OF ENSILAGE CUTTER. (TEAM UNHITCHED TO SHOW CUTTER.)]

The round barn has a special advantage in the work of distributing
silage to the cows. The feeding commences at the chute where it is
thrown down, and is continued around the circle, ending with the silage
cart at the chute again, ready for the next feeding. The same thing is
true in feeding hay and grain.

Still another great advantage is the large unobstructed hay mow. With
the self-supporting roof, there are no timbers whatever obstructing the
mow, which means no dragging of hay around posts or over girders. The
hay carrier runs on a circular track around the mow, midway between the
silo and the outside wall, and drops the hay at any desired point, thus
in no case does the hay have to be moved but a few feet, which means a
saving of much labor in the mowing.

To successfully embody all of the above discussed advantages in a dairy
barn is one of the large problems in milk production. In a careful study
of the barn question it soon became apparent that it was impossible to
embody all of the requirements advantageously in anything but a circular
form of building, and the 60-foot round barn, which is here described,
was built.

[Illustration: FIG. 4. SOUTH VIEW, SHOWING WELL LIGHTED STABLE.]


CIRCULAR CONSTRUCTION THE STRONGEST

The circular construction is the strongest, because it takes advantage
of the lineal, instead of the breaking strength of the lumber. Each row
of boards running around the barn forms a hoop that holds the barn
together. A barrel, properly hooped and headed, is almost indestructible,
and much stronger than a box, altho the hoops are small. This strength
is because the stress comes on the hoops in a lineal direction. Any
piece of timber is many times stronger on a lineal pull than on a
breaking stress. Take for example a No. 1 yellow pine 2 × 6, 16 feet
long, with an actual cross section of 1-5/8 × 5-5/8 inches. If placed
on edge and supported at the ends, as a joist, the limit of safety for a
load evenly distributed is 642 pounds, while the limit of safety for a
load in the lineal direction of the same piece of timber is 12,800
pounds, or twenty times as great.

[Illustration: FIG. 5. IN COW STABLE, SHOWING SILO AND FEED ALLEY IN
CENTER OF BARN; STANCHIONS ON RIGHT, MILK SCALES AND RECORD SHEET ON
LEFT.]

All exposed surfaces of a round barn are circular, as both the sides and
roof are arched, which is the strongest form of construction to resist
wind pressure; besides, the wind, in striking it, glances off and can
get no direct hold on the walls or roof, as it can on the flat sides or
gable ends of a rectangular structure. If the lumber is properly placed
in a round barn, much of it will perform two or more functions. Every
row of siding boards running around the building serves also as a brace,
and the same is true of the roof boards and the arched rafters. If the
siding is put on vertically and the roof built dome-shaped, no
scaffolding is required inside or out. These are points of economy in
the round construction.


RECTANGULAR BARNS REQUIRE 34 TO 58 PERCENT MORE MATERIAL

In order to compare the amount and cost of material in round and
rectangular barns, the following figures have been carefully worked out
by an expert barn builder. Two comparisons, based on wood construction
thruout, are made, in which round barns 60 feet and 90 feet in diameter
are compared with both plank and mortise frame rectangular barns
containing the same number of square feet of floor space, respectively.
Since the most practical width of a rectangular dairy barn is 36 feet,
its length will depend upon the number of square feet required in the
barn.

[Illustration: FIG. 6. SHOWING CONSTRUCTION OF MORTISE FRAME BARN, END
VIEW.]

[Illustration: FIG. 7. SHOWING CONSTRUCTION OF PLANK FRAME BARN, SIDE
VIEW.]

Figures 6 to 9 are side and end views, showing the detail construction
and size of the timbers of the plank frame and mortise frame barns here
figured. The detailed figures of the lumber bills for each of these
barns were carefully worked out, but are too voluminous for publication
here. The total number of feet of each kind of lumber required is given
in Tables 1A and 1B. Since the proportion of the different kinds of
lumber and shingles varied for the different barns, to draw an exact
comparison it was necessary to base it upon the money value, and for
this purpose the total cost of lumber has been figured in each case. The
lumber values used thruout are the best average prices that could be
obtained. As the same prices are used for the material of all the barns,
the comparisons of cost are correct, altho these exact prices will not
hold for all localities and all times.

[Illustration: FIG. 8. SHOWING CONSTRUCTION OF PLANK FRAME BARN, END
VIEW.]

Since a silo cannot be economically built inside of a rectangular barn,
the first comparison is made with the barns simply enclosed, altho one
of the chief advantages of a round barn is the deep silo which it is
possible to build so economically in the center.

[Illustration: FIG. 9. SHOWING CONSTRUCTION OF MORTISE FRAME BARN, SIDE
VIEW.]

Another item of economy in the circular barn is less framing lumber.
This form has the strongest possible construction with the least lumber
in the frame, and the least bracing, not a single timber larger than a
2 × 6 being required above the sill. The arched circular roof requires no
supports, and no scaffolding is needed inside during its construction.

The accompanying tables show the comparative amount and value of lumber
and cubical content in round barns 60 and 90 feet in diameter, and
rectangular barns of equal area and height of posts.

TABLE 1A.--A COMPARISON OF THE COST OF MATERIAL IN ROUND AND RECTANGULAR
BARNS OF THE SAME AREA, _Not Including_ Foundation And Silos.

  A: Framing lumber,
  B: Sheathing, siding, and flooring,
  C: Shingles,
  D: Bolts,
  E: Total cost of lumber,
  F: Content, cubic feet,

  ==+=====================+===========================================
    |                     |    Rectangular barn, 36 × 78-1/2 ft.
    |     Round barn,     +---------------------+---------------------
    | 60 feet in diameter |    Plank frame      |   Mortise frame
  --+---------------------+---------------------+---------------------
  A | 13,976 ft. @ $25    | 19,833 ft. @ $25    | 29,074 ft. @ $25
    |           = $349.40 |           = $495.83 |           = $726.85
  B | 12,971 ft. @ $22    | 15,355 ft. @ $22    | 15,355 ft. @ $22
    |           =  285.36 |            = 337.81 |           =  337.81
  C | 44,000 @ $3.75      | 45,000 @ $3.75      | 45,000 @ $3.75
    |           =  165.00 |            = 168.75 |           =  168.75
  D |                     |               20.88 |
  --+---------------------+---------------------+---------------------
  E |            =$799.76=|           =$1023.27=|           =$1233.41=
  ==+=====================+=====================+=====================
  F | =117,669=           | =117,138=           | =117,138=
  ==+=====================+=====================+=====================


TABLE 1B.

  A: Framing lumber,
  B: Sheathing, siding, and flooring,
  C: Shingles,
  D: Bolts,
  E: Total cost of lumber,
  F: Content, cubic feet,

  ==+=====================+===========================================
    |                     |    Rectangular barn, 36 × 176-3/4 ft.
    |     Round barn,     +---------------------+---------------------
    | 90 feet in diameter |    Plank frame      |   Mortise frame
  --+---------------------+---------------------+---------------------
  A | 30,899 ft. @ $25    | 38,815 ft. @ $25    | 59,481 ft. @$25
    |           = $772.48 |           = $970.38 |           = $1487.03
  B | 22,375 ft. @ $22    | 28,547 ft. @ $22    | 28,547 ft. @ $22
    |           =  492.25 |           =  628.03 |           =   628.03
  C | 97,000   @ $3.75    | 102,000  @ $3.75    | 102,000  @ $3.75
    |           =  363.75 |            = 382.50 |             = 382.50
  D |                     |               26.76 |
  --+---------------------+---------------------+---------------------
  E |          =$1628.48= |          =$2007.67= |           =$2497.56=
  ==+=====================+=====================+=====================
  F | =322,952=           | =270,570=           | =270,570=
  ==+=====================+=====================+=====================


ROUND AND RECTANGULAR BARNS COMPARED

In comparing the 60-foot round barn with a rectangular barn of the same
area, the two barns should afford the cows the same amount of space on
the platform. Allowing each cow in the 60-foot round barn 3 feet 6
inches in width at the rear of the platform, it will accommodate 40 cows
and leave space for two passage ways. But in a rectangular barn, only 3
feet 4 inches of platform space need be allowed for each cow, and the
78-1/2 foot barn, with two 3-foot passage ways across it for convenience
in feeding, will accommodate 42 cows. While the rectangular barn has
stall room for two more cows, the round barn contains space in the
center for a silo 18 feet in diameter.

The floor space and cubical content of the round barn 60 feet in
diameter, and the rectangular barn compared with it in these tables, are
practically the same, and the barns are therefore directly comparable.
This being true, the percentages which were figured from the complete
bills of material for these barns show the exact saving in lumber on the
60-foot round barn over the plank and mortise frame rectangular barns
36 × 78-1/2 feet. The lumber bills of the rectangular barns show an
increase in cost of 28 percent for the plank frame and 54 percent for
the mortise frame. The round barn, 60 feet in diameter, contains
188-1/2, and the rectangular barn 225 lineal feet of wall. The
rectangular barn has, therefore, 22 percent more lineal feet of outside
barn wall, requiring a proportional increase in both paint and
foundation.

The 176-3/4-foot rectangular barn would hold 100 cows, allowing each cow
3 feet 4 inches in width and providing for 3 passage ways of 3 feet each
across the barn.

The 90-foot round barn would hold 100 cows in two rows headed together,
65 of which would be in the outer circle, and have 3 feet 6 inches each
in width at the gutter. This leaves sufficient room for feed alleys and
walks, and two passage ways, one three feet and the other seven feet
wide for the manure and feed carriers. All of this is outside of a
central space for a silo 20 feet in diameter and 71 feet high, with a
capacity for 620 tons of silage, and in the mow there would still be an
excess, above the capacity of the rectangular barn, of 33,000 cubic
feet, which would hold 66 tons of hay, or as much as the entire mow of
a barn 32 × 36 feet with 20-foot posts.

TABLE 2A.--A COMPARISON OF THE COST OF MATERIAL IN ROUND AND RECTANGULAR
BARNS, _Including_ FOUNDATION AND SILOS.

  ========================+=============+=============================
                          | Round barn, | Rectangular barn,
                          | 60 feet in  |          36 × 78-1/2 ft.
                          |  diameter   +-------------+---------------
                          |             | Plank frame | Mortise frame
  ------------------------+-------------+-------------+---------------
  Lumber in barn,         |   $799.76   |  $1023.27   |  $1233.41
  Material in foundation, |     86.89   |    105.90   |    105.90
  Material in silo,       |    159.01   |    295.26   |    295.26
  ------------------------+-------------+-------------+---------------
  Total cost of material  |             |             |
    in barn,              | =$1045.66=  | =$1424.43=  | =$1634.57=
  ========================+=============+=============+===============
  Actual money saved,     |             |  =$378.77=  |  =$588.91=
  ------------------------+-------------+-------------+---------------
  Proportional cost,      |    =100%=   |    =136%=   |    =156%=
  ========================+=============+=============+===============


TABLE 2B.

  ========================+=============+=============================
                          | Round barn, | Rectangular barn,
                          | 90 feet in  |          36 × 176-3/4 ft.
                          |  diameter   +-------------+---------------
                          |             | Plank frame | Mortise frame
  ------------------------+-------------+-------------+---------------
  Lumber in barn,         |  $1628.48   |  $2007.67   |  $2497.56
  Material in foundation, |    130.35   |    196.80   |    196.80
  Material in silo,       |    265.00   |    513.52   |    513.52
  ------------------------+-------------+-------------+---------------
  Total cost of material  |             |             |
    in barn,              | =$2023.83=  | =$2717.99=  | =$3207.88=
  ========================+=============+=============+===============
  Actual money saved,     |             |  =$694.16=  | =$1184.05=
  ------------------------+-------------+-------------+---------------
  Proportional cost,      |    =100%=   |    =134%=   |    =158%=
  ========================+=============+=============+===============


The square feet of floor space in the round barn 90 feet in diameter and
rectangular barn 36 × 176-3/4 feet are the same, but the cubical content
of the former is more than that of the latter. The increase in the
lumber bill is 23 percent in the plank frame and 53 percent in the
mortise frame barn. The round barn 90 feet in diameter contains 283 and
the rectangular barn 426 lineal feet of wall. The rectangular barn has,
therefore, 50 percent more lineal feet of outside barn wall, requiring a
proportional increase in both paint and foundation.

The smaller surface on the outside wall of the round barn requires less
paint and makes a proportional saving in keeping the round barn painted
in after years.


ROUND AND RECTANGULAR BARNS, _Including Silos_, COMPARED

Owing to the fact that a silo is a necessity for the most economical
production of milk, a barn is not complete for a dairyman's purpose
unless it includes a silo with capacity to store sufficient silage for
the herd. In the case of the round barn, the silo is most economically
built inside, but in the rectangular form would cause a waste of space,
and for that reason is best erected outside. Therefore, in comparing a
round dairy barn with a rectangular dairy barn, silos should be
included.

In figuring the cost of materials in the silos for the round and
rectangular barns, the capacity needed in each case was determined in
the following manner: Allowing 40 pounds of silage per cow per day for 7
winter months and 25 pounds per cow per day for 3 months during the
summer, would require for 40 cows 220 tons; then allowing one-eighth for
waste would make the silage requirement 248 tons. As the silo in the
round barn 60 feet in diameter is 53 feet deep, it would need to be only
16 feet in diameter to hold 250 tons. This diameter is sufficiently
small to allow summer feeding without waste. To erect a silo outside of
a barn, with sufficient stability to stand well, the height above ground
should not be much more than twice the diameter, and in order to avoid
waste for summer feeding, the diameter should not be greater than 16
feet for a herd of 40 cows. In order that a deep enough layer of silage
can be fed off each day during the summer to avoid waste, it is evident
that to store 250 tons of silage outside the barn, two silos would be
required. One of these should be 16 feet in diameter and 36 feet deep,
holding 154 tons, and the other 13 feet in diameter and 36 feet deep,
holding 102 tons, making a total silo capacity of 256 tons.

As the large barns hold 100 cows, the same allowance of silage per cow
for the season would require silo capacity for 620 tons. As the silo in
the round barn 90 feet in diameter would be 71 feet deep, it would need
to be only 20 feet in diameter to hold 620 tons. To store 620 tons of
silage in silos built outside the rectangular barn would require two
silos, each 20 feet in diameter and 44 feet deep.[B] These are the sizes
on which the figures for cost of silos of the Gurler type, given in
Tables 2A and 2B, were used.

    [B] Since the deeper the silo the more firmly the silage
    packs, one silo 71 feet deep will hold as much as two silos
    of the same diameter and 44 feet deep.

[Illustration: FIG. 10. INTERIOR OF COW STABLE, SHOWING WATER TROUGH
WITH FLOAT VALVE, SALT BOX, AND DOOR INTO DAIRY.]

The table (page 12) is the final summing up of the cost of all the
material for the completed dairy barns, with silos, and shows a saving
of from 34 to 58 percent in favor of the round barn and silo, or an
actual money saving in this case of from $379 to $1184, depending upon
the size and construction of the barns.

Thoughtlessly, men go on building rectangular barns, but what would this
reckless disregard of a possible saving of 34 to 58 percent mean in a
year's business on the farm? Some illustrations may help us to
understand what this money saved in building a round barn really amounts
to, and its convenience is also a great saving. If the dairyman
discarded the idea of a rectangular barn and built a round barn
instead, he could take the money thus saved and buy one of the best
pure-bred sires for his herd, and also three to ten pure-bred heifers or
fine grade cows. Either of these purchases might double the profit of
the herd. Or, this saving, properly applied, would purchase many
labor-saving devices which would make life less of a drudgery on many
dairy farms. Is not such a saving worth while?

[Illustration: FIG. 11. COW COMFORT IN A ROUND BARN.]

When the comparative cost and merit of two constructions are known, it
is a poor financier who will pay extra for the one which is inferior. If
a man received bids from contractors for a building, he would be a
foolish man who would accept one which is from 34 to 58 percent higher
than the lowest bidder, especially when he knew the lowest bidder would
put up the most convenient and substantial building.




DISADVANTAGES OF THE ROUND DAIRY BARN


The disadvantages of the round dairy barn are, that it cannot be
enlarged by building on as readily as can the rectangular form, but as
the round barn may be built higher to the eaves than a rectangular barn
36 feet wide, provision can be made for the growth of the herd by
building so as to put cows in the second story and still leave
sufficient mow room for hay.

The objection is frequently raised that a round barn is difficult to
light. This difficulty is entirely overcome in a barn 90 feet or less in
diameter, if a sufficient number of properly spaced windows are used.
See Figs. 4 and 30. With the same number of windows, the light is more
evenly distributed in a round barn and the sun can shine directly into
some portion at all hours of the day during the winter.

[Illustration: FIG. 12. FIRST STORY WALL, AND FOUNDATION FOR SILO, FEED
ALLEY, AND MANGER; SILL IN PLACE, READY FOR JOISTS AND STUDS.]

The objection has been raised that rectangular objects cannot be placed
in a circle without a waste of space, but this does not apply to a dairy
barn, as the storage of hay and grain depends upon cubical content,
alone, and silos should always be circular, no matter where built. Cows,
when lying down, are decidedly wedge-shaped, requiring much less space
in front than behind. The objection may be raised, with round barns
large enough for two rows of cows, that the row headed out does not use
the space as economically as in the rectangular form, because a cow
needs more width at the rear of the platform than at the manger. Where
there are two rows of cows, the inner row is usually headed out, and as
only about one-third of the cows are in this row, this loss of space is
counterbalanced by the large number of cows in the outer circle using
the space more economically than they do in the rectangular barn.

Box stalls cannot be as conveniently arranged, but in a one-row barn,
gates hung on the outside and swung around to the manger, form stalls
for cows at freshening time, and in a barn with two rows, box stalls can
be arranged in the inner circle.




HOW THE ROUND BARN AT THE UNIVERSITY WAS BUILT


The barn is located on the side of a hill, sloping gently to the south
and east. With this location, it was an advantage to excavate 5 feet
deep on the northwest and run out to the surface of the ground on the
southeast.

[Illustration: FIG. 13. SHOWING TEMPORARY BRACING TO HOLD STUDS IN PLACE
WHILE SHIP LAP CEILING IS NAILED ON.]

The footing for the foundation is 18 inches wide. A ten-inch brick wall
was carried up nine feet above the stable floor. This wall contains a
2-inch air space to prevent moisture from condensing on the inner wall
and making the barn damp. This is an important point, as barns with a
solid stone or brick wall are very objectionable on account of dampness.
It has been proven by two years' use that this difficulty is entirely
obviated by the air space in the wall.

The foundation for the manger and feed alley is built up 2 feet above
the stable floor. The foundation for the silo extends 4 feet below the
stable floor and is continued 9 inches above the floor in the feed
alley. This silo wall, together with the foundation under the manger,
forms the foundation for the center supports of the barn. Fig. 12 shows
the foundation completed.

The silo, which is the Gurler type, was then started and carried up with
the barn. It was built by placing 2 × 4 studs around the circle, one
foot on centers, and ceiling inside with 1/2 × 6-inch lumber. This
1/2-inch lumber was obtained by re-sawing 1 × 6 yellow pine fencing.
Common lath were then put on horizontally in the regular way inside,
without furring out, and plastered with rich cement plaster.

The sill of the barn is 6 × 6, made up of 1 × 6s, and built on top of
the wall. Building it up in this manner makes a stronger sill than can
be obtained in any other way, as it forms a continuous hoop around the
barn.

[Illustration: FIG. 14. SHOWING HEIGHT AND CONSTRUCTION OF SILO, SIDING
COMPLETED, AND FOUR MAIN RAFTERS IN PLACE.]

The joists are 2 × 12s notched 6 inches to fit the sill, so that the
outer ends rest on both the sill and the brick wall. The outer span of
joists is 14 feet and the inner ends of these joists rest on a similar
sill built of 1 × 6s on top of the 4 × 4 supports at the stanchions. The
inner span of joists, between the stanchions and the silo, is 8 feet,
the outer end resting on the sill over the stanchions, and the inner end
on a 1-1/2 × 6-inch band, made up of three 1/2 × 6-inch pieces, running
around the outside of the silo. These joists are placed 2-1/2 feet apart
at the outside of the barn, and half as many joists are used in the
inner span, making the joists at the silo one foot apart. The number of
joists under the driveways are doubled, being only 1 foot and 3 inches
apart at the outside of the barn.

[Illustration: FIG. 15. SHOWING ALL RAFTERS IN PLACE AND METHOD OF
SHEATHING ROOF.]

The studs, which are 2 × 6s, 20 feet long, were then placed on the sill,
about 2 feet 6 inches apart, being as evenly spaced between the windows
as possible, and temporarily braced, as shown in Fig. 13, until the
8-inch ship lap ceiling could be nailed on the outside. This was carried
up 5 feet to the second scaffold, and then covered to this height with
shingles laid 5 inches to the weather. The scaffolding was then moved up
and this process repeated until the siding was completed. The plate,
made up of five 1 × 4s, was then built in the notch in the top of the
studs shown in Fig. 13.

[Illustration: FIG. 16. SHOWING HEIGHT OF SILO, CAPACITY OF BARN, AND
CONSTRUCTION OF ROOF.]

The silo was completed, as before described. The rafters, which were
framed on the ground, were then erected, as shown in Fig. 14, the first
eight going to the center of the roof, and the remaining ones were cut
to rest on the plate of the silo. There are 64 framed rafters, and these
are the only ones in the upper section of the roof. At the break in the
roof, a header is cut in between the framed rafters, and in the lower
section a rafter is placed between these, thus making twice as many
rafters in the lower section of the roof as in the upper section. After
the rafters were all in place and temporarily braced, the 1 × 2-inch
sheathing was put on, as shown in Fig. 15, and the shingles, which were
the best 5/2 red cedar, were laid 5 inches to the weather on the lower
section of the roof, and 4 inches to the weather on the upper section,
as this had less pitch. No chalk line was necessary, as the shingles
were laid by the sheathing.

[Illustration: FIG. 17. SHOWING ARRANGEMENT OF JOISTS AND HOW THE FLOOR
IS LAID.]

The floor was made of 1 × 8 ship lap, laid in four directions, as shown
in Fig. 17. In the driveway an extra layer of ship lap was used, making
this portion of the floor 2 inches thick.

The doorways in the second story are 14 feet wide, and in the lower
story 12 feet. These openings are closed by two sliding doors, each door
being made of two sections, hinged together so as to follow the circular
wall of the barn in opening.

The cow stable is on the ground floor, and well lighted by 16 windows
having twelve 9 × 12 lights each. There are also six windows in the
doors. The windows are placed just below the ceiling and admit an
abundance of sunshine at all times of the day, which is one of the
essentials of a good dairy barn.

[Illustration: FIG. 18. SHOWING PRESENT ARRANGEMENT OF COW STABLE. THERE
ARE STANCHIONS AND MANGERS FOR 28 COWS, AND 2200 SQ. FT. OF FLOOR SPACE
IN WHICH THE COWS CAN RUN LOOSE. THE GATES ARE SWUNG INTO THE PRESENT
POSITION WHEN BOX STALLS ARE NEEDED.]

The floor, back of the manger, is of clay, except at the door, where a
small portion is covered with cement. The cows run loose except at
feeding and milking time, when they are placed in rigid stanchions. It
must be distinctly understood that rigid stanchions are strongly
condemned as a cow tie, where cows are to remain in them all night, but
as they are here used merely to hold the cow during milking, they are
both economical and convenient.

[Illustration: FIG. 19. SHOWING CROSS SECTION OF 60-FOOT ROUND BARN.]

[Illustration: FIG. 20. CLEANING OUT COW STABLE WITH THREE-HORSE MANURE
SPREADER.]

[Illustration: FIG. 21. COWS IN STANCHION AT MILKING TIME.]

Running cows loose in this manner is an excellent method, where bedding
is abundant and sufficient space is available, as the cows are more
comfortable, and all fertility is saved. There is no waste from
leaching, as when the manure lies exposed to the weather. This method
saves the labor of cleaning the stable, as the manure is loaded into the
spreader and hauled directly upon the land whenever convenient, and the
land is in the best condition to receive it.[C]

    [C] For a more detailed discussion of the advantages of
    keeping cows in this manner, see Illinois Agricultural
    Experiment Station Circular No. 93.

Three gates are hung on posts at the outside wall, and when box stalls
are needed, these are swung around to the manger, as shown in Fig. 18.
The south door in the cow stable can be closed by slatted gates, thus
affording an abundance of fresh air and sunshine on nice days, without
letting the cows out of the barn.


SYSTEM OF VENTILATION

[Illustration: FIG. 21. CONTINUED.]

The system of ventilation is the "King." To economize space and lumber,
the hay chute is used for a ventilator. This chute, which extends to the
cupola, is 2-1/4 × 3-1/2 feet, having a cross section area of 8 sq. ft.,
which, with a good draft, is sufficient for 40 cows. In order that this
combination of ventilator and hay chute prove practical, doors thru
which the hay could be thrust were placed at intervals in the side of
the chute. These doors are hinged at the top, opening in, and close
immediately after the hay drops, thus maintaining a closed ventilator
chute. The air is drawn in at the bottom, the amount being regulated by
means of a sliding door in the side. As this chute is 50 feet high, it
creates a strong suction.


THE MILK ROOM

To economize space, the milk room, 12 × 16 feet, is located under the
north driveway. The brick walls under the drive form the sides of this
room, and the floor of the drive, which is made of 2 × 6s grooved on
both edges, forms the roof. The grooves in the flooring were filled with
white lead, and a wooden strip, fitted to fill the grooves of both
planks, was driven in, forming a water-tight floor. This floor was
covered with hot tar and sand 1/2 inch thick. The milk room is plastered
on the inside, the plaster being applied directly to the brick walls,
excepting in the case of the ceiling, which is lathed. The floor and
cooling tank are of cement. The passage from the barn to the milk room
is thru a small hallway, which is open to the outside, thus preventing
the stable air getting into the milk room.

[Illustration: FIG. 22. FEED ALLEY, SHOWING COMBINED HAY CHUTE AND
VENTILATOR. A DOOR ON THE SIDE WHICH IS HINGED AT THE BOTTOM, 3 FEET
FROM THE FLOOR, IS LET IN TOWARD THE SILO, SLIDING THE HAY ONTO THE
FLOOR. IN HOT WEATHER THIS OPENING TAKES THE HEAT OUT OF THE BARN;
DURING THE WINTER THIS DOOR IS KEPT CLOSED AND THE VENTILATION IS
REGULATED BY RAISING THE SLIDE, AS SHOWN IN THE CUT.]


BARN SATISFACTORY

This round dairy barn above described has been in use for over two years
at the University of Illinois, and has given entire satisfaction.

[Illustration: FIG. 23. NORTHEAST VIEW, SHOWING DAIRY UNDER DRIVEWAY.
THE BARN IS ON THE SAME SCALE AS THE DRAWING ON PAGE 28.]

[Illustration: FIG. 24. INTERIOR OF DAIRY; COOLING TANK ON LEFT.]


RE-ARRANGEMENT OF BARN TO ACCOMMODATE 40 COWS

If it is desired to keep cows in stalls in a round barn of this size,
the circular manger can be enlarged to 38 feet in diameter, which gives
room for forty cows, as shown in Fig. 25, and the silo, to hold
sufficient silage to feed the year round, enlarged to 18 feet in
diameter. The present mow room is sufficient to store enough hay and
bedding for this number of cows.

The barn on the Twenty-acre Demonstration Dairy Farm was built this
large, as it was thought it might be desired at some future time to
increase the size of the farm and herd, and the barn could easily be
changed to accommodate a larger herd by simply enlarging the silo,
without rebuilding the barn.

[Illustration: FIG. 25. SHOWING HOW THIS 60-FOOT BARN MAY BE ARRANGED TO
ACCOMMODATE 40 COWS IN STALLS. TO SUPPLY THIS SIZED HERD AND THE
NECESSARY YOUNG STOCK WITH SILAGE FOR EIGHT MONTHS WOULD REQUIRE A
370-TON SILO, OR ONE 18 FEET IN DIAMETER AND 56 FEET DEEP; WITH A
SEVEN-FOOT FEED ALLEY AND A 2-1/2-FOOT MANGER, THE CIRCLE AT THE
STANCHIONS WOULD BE 38 FEET IN DIAMETER, OR 119-1/3 FEET IN
CIRCUMFERENCE; ALLOWING 4-1/4 FEET FOR TWO PASSAGE WAYS, THE STALLS
WOULD BE 2 FEET 10-1/2 INCHES WIDE AT THE STANCHION, AND 3 FEET 6 INCHES
AT THE DROP.]


ITEMIZED COST OF THIS ROUND BARN

  Excavating, foundation, and first story brick wall        $904.00

  Lumber:

    149 pieces, 1     ×  4     × 16        Y. P.
     31   "     1     ×  4     × 14       Cypress
     16   "     1     ×  4     × 12          "
    165   "     1     ×  6     × 16        Y. P.
     17   "     1     ×  6     × 14          "
    226   "     2     ×  4     × 12          "
     20   "     2     ×  4     × 16          "
      6   "     2     ×  4     × 14          "
     15   "     4     ×  4     × 14          "
    120   "     2     × 12     × 16          "
     23   "     2     × 12     × 14          "
    100   "     2     ×  6     × 20          "
    144   "     2     ×  6     × 16          "
     67   "     2     ×  6     × 18          "
      4   "     2     ×  6     × 26          "
     60   "     2     ×  6     × 12          "
     30   "     2     ×  6     × 22          "
      4   "     2     ×  6     × 24          "
      6   "     2     ×  8     × 10          "
      9   "     2     ×  8     × 16          "
      4   "     2     × 10     × 14          "
     11   "     2     × 10     × 12          "
      1   "     2     × 10     × 22          "
      1   "     1     × 10     × 12          "
      1   "     1     × 10     × 14       Cypress
      2   "     1     × 12     × 14          "
     22   "     1-1/8 ×  8     × 10       Cyp. S2S
      2   "     1     ×  1-1/8 × 12 × 14     "
      2   "     1     ×  1-1/8 × 12 × 16     "
    6000 feet of 8-inch ship lap
    3150 feet of 10-inch ship lap
      71 M 5/2 red cedar shingles
     165 Lineal feet of 2-inch Cr. molding
     240 Lineal feet of Cr. molding
     270 feet of 4-inch Y. P. S1S
    4000 feet of 6-inch rough pine
      62 feet of 3/8-inch Y. P. Ceiling
     850 feet of 6-inch No. 1 flooring
     230 feet of 6-inch fence flooring
      56 lineal feet of 1/2 × 3-inch battening
      32 lineal feet of lattice
     444 lineal feet of 4-inch cypress
       3 10-foot cedar posts
            Total cost of lumber                          $1,313.63

        Mill work:
    Window sash and doors                                   $270.00
    Window and door frames                                    71.00
    Sawing lumber for silo, roof, bridge and stanchions       29.78
    Cost of hardware                                          96.57

        Carpenter work:
    Head carpenter                518 hrs. @ 40c = $207.20
    Carpenters                   1057 hrs. @ 35c =  369.95
    Common labor                  429 hrs. @ 20c =   85.80
                                                   -------
            Total cost for carpenter work                    662.95

    Tiling around barn and silo, sewer from dairy room,
      retaining wall, cement floor in alley, dairy,
      doorway of barn, and steps and tanks                   128.54
    Plastering dairy room and inside of silo                 104.60
    Painting                                                  89.54
                                                           --------
            Total cost of barn                             $3670.61


[Illustration: FIG. 26. BARN NO. 2. 80 FEET IN DIAMETER; ENGINE ROOM IN
FOREGROUND.]

The cost of this barn, if built on the ordinary dairy farm, could be
materially reduced without shortening the life of the barn. Owing to the
conditions under which this barn was built, it was necessary to pay for
hauling all material to the farm, two and one-half miles from town. All
of the labor had to be hired, and as it was necessary for the men to
board themselves the wages paid were proportionately higher. The farmer
usually does the excavating and hauls the brick, sand, and lumber with
his own teams, tends the mason, and does quite an amount of the rough
work with his own help, besides boarding the men, all of which would
greatly reduce the cost. The construction could also be cheapened by
using drop siding to cover the outside, instead of shingles, which in
this case were used over ship lap on the side walls to improve the
appearance. This barn could be still further cheapened by putting hoops,
five feet apart, around the studs, and covering with common 1 × 12
boards, put on vertically, as is done in some cases. A saving could also
be made on the mill work and large doors by having the carpenters make
these plainer and leave the windows out of them.

Anyone wishing to build a round barn can get local bids on the lumber
bill, and determine approximately the cost in his locality. This will
vary with both the location and the year.




OTHER ROUND DAIRY BARNS


BARN NO. 2

Built 1897.

Diameter, 80 feet.

Capacity, 75 cows in 2 rows, tails together, 51 head in outer circle, 24
head in inner circle.

[Illustration: FIG. 27. INTERIOR OF BARN NO. 2. SHOWING TWO ROWS OF
STANCHIONS AND DRIVE BEHIND COWS WHICH IS USED IN CLEANING BARN; SILO ON
RIGHT.]

Cost, $1800.

Studs, 2 × 6s, placed 2-1/2 feet on center.

Supports, two 2 × 6s in each stanchion.

Joists, main span 3 × 12s, 20 feet long, placed 14 inches on center.
Short spans over feed alleys, 2 × 10s.

Plate, 1 × 10-inch boards sprung around near top of studs.

Roof supports, 6 × 6s placed 12 feet apart. Purline plate rests on these
posts and consists of 1 × 8s sprung to the circle.

Siding, 8-inch, put on horizontally, first story ceiled inside.

To clean out, a wagon is driven around between the two rows of cows.

The chief objection to this barn is insufficient light in the cow
stable.

This barn and No. 3 are approximately the same in construction, and are
more substantially built than barns No. 4 and 5.

[Illustration: FIG. 28. ARRANGEMENT OF COW STABLE IN BARN NO. 2; TWO
ROWS OF COWS TAILED TOGETHER. THE BARN IS CLEANED BY DRIVING AROUND
BEHIND THE COWS.]

[Illustration: FIG. 29. BARN NO. 3. 80 FEET IN DIAMETER.]


BARN NO. 4

Built in 1900.

Diameter, 90 feet.

Capacity, 105 cows, two rows heading together.

Cost, $3000.

Foundation, width at base and top, 18 inches; depth in ground, 20
inches, (not sufficient).

Sills, 2 × 8s, sawed in short lengths, and placed flatwise.

Studding, 20-foot 2 × 8s, placed 3 feet on center and toenailed to sill.

Supports, first story 4 × 4s placed between stanchions in each row,
making two rows of supports between the outside wall and the silo; 4 ×
4s cut to a circle placed on top of these supports. The outside span,
over cows, is 13 feet 6 inches; middle span, over feed alley, 6 feet 8
inches, and inside span, over cows, 13 feet.

Joists, 2 × 8s placed 3 feet apart at studs on outside wall. There are
as many joists in center of barn as at the outside.

Supports, second-story, consist of one row of posts running around at a
point immediately under the break in the roof. These are 16 feet apart
and are made of three 2 × 8s kept 2 inches apart by horizontal braces
which run from studding near the eave thru these posts to studding in
silo. See Fig. 31.

Plate, rafter is set on top of each stud, and no plate is used.

Rafters, 2 × 6s resting on studs at outside and on circular plate at
break in roof.

[Illustration: FIG. 30. BARN NO. 4. 90 FEET IN DIAMETER; ONE OF THE FEW
DAIRY BARNS WITH SUFFICIENT LIGHT; SAME SCALE AS DRAWING ON PAGE 37.]

[Illustration: FIG. 31. SILO IN CENTER OF BARN NO. 4; UPPER PORTION IN
HAY LOFT. LOWER PORTION IN COW STABLE.]

Siding, 8-inch drop siding, put on horizontally, nailed with 10d nails.
Ends holding well.

Windows, 12 light, 10 × 12 glass; one window every six feet. This gives
an abundance of light in the center of the barn.

Doors, built on circle; (not satisfactory).

Silo, round; diameter, 24 feet over all; height, 53 feet, exclusive of
12-foot space for water tank on top; capacity, 500 tons. Studs of silo,
2 × 4s placed 12 inches on center. Ceiled inside of studs with two
thicknesses of half-inch lumber with paper between.

[Illustration: FIG. 32. INTERIOR OF BARN NO. 4, SHOWING STALLS AND FEED
ALLEY.]

Remarks: Considering its size, the construction of this barn is
apparently too light to be substantial, as the joists and studs are too
small and too far apart, yet it has stood for nine years with no more
evidence of wear than is common with any barn.

Were the owner to build again he would place the studs only 2-1/2 feet
apart and use 2 × 12 joists, 2-1/2 feet apart at the outside wall. He
would also use cement plaster on inside of silo.

The owner says it would have cost him as much to have built a
rectangular barn without the 500-ton silo, and containing 1300 sq. ft.
less floor space. In other words, he gained a 500-ton silo and 1300 sq.
ft. of floor space, besides an immense amount of mow room, by building a
circular barn.

[Illustration: FIG. 33. ARRANGEMENT OF COW STABLE IN BARN NO. 4, 90 FEET
IN DIAMETER; TWO ROWS OF COWS HEADED TOGETHER.]


BARN NO. 5

Built in 1906.

Diameter, 100 feet.

Capacity, 115 cows.

Cost, $3400.

Studding, 16-foot 2 × 6s, placed 3 feet on centers.

Supports, 3 rows 4 × 4s.

Joists, 2 × 10s, placed 3 feet on centers. Hemlock and yellow pine.

Floor, laid in eight directions.

Rafters, 2 × 6s spiked to studs. A band of two 1 × 6s is placed around
the studs just below the rafters, and helps support the rafters.

Supports for roof. There are three purline plates. Two of these are
supported by posts, the other by braces running out from the silo. The
roof is straight from eaves to peak. The bracing is similar to that of
barn No. 4.

Silo, 18 feet in diameter, 56 feet deep, 2 feet in ground. Capacity, 350
tons.

[Illustration: FIG. 34. BARN 92 FEET IN DIAMETER; TWO ROWS OF COWS
HEADED TOGETHER; SILO IN CENTER.]

[Illustration: FIG. 35. VIEW OF 70-FOOT SELF-SUPPORTING ROOF ON BARN
SHOWN IN FIG. 36; NOTE HOOPS ON STUDS IN RIGHT FOREGROUND.]

[Illustration: FIG. 36. BARN 70 FEET IN DIAMETER; FRAME HOOPED FOR
PERPENDICULAR SIDING; LOWER SECTION SIDED.]


THE SMALL DAIRYMAN'S BARN

[Illustration: FIG. 37. BARN 40 FEET IN DIAMETER.]

[Illustration: FIG. 38. BARN 48 FEET IN DIAMETER, 16-FOOT POSTS; NOTE
METHOD OF TAKING HAY INTO SMALL ROUND BARN.]

The round barns previously described do not meet the needs of the man
with only a few cows. He usually wants a general-purpose barn. The
circular form can be made satisfactory for this purpose if proper
attention is given to the plan. It is necessary that the cow stable be
distinctly separated from all other stock by a tight wall. Round barns
with this arrangement are giving satisfaction in Illinois at the present
time.

[Illustration: FIG. 39. SHOWING CONSTRUCTION OF BARN IN FIG. 40. HOOPS
IN PLACE READY FOR PERPENDICULAR SIDING; ROOF SHEATHED FOR SHINGLES.]

[Illustration: FIG. 40. BARN 102 FEET IN DIAMETER AND 85 FEET HIGH.]




DISADVANTAGES OF THE POLYGONAL BARN.


A polygonal barn has the disadvantages of both the rectangular and the
round barn, and is less stable than either. It must necessarily have a
heavy frame, which is expensive, and as the siding cannot run around the
corners, it is very difficult to tie the different sides together
sufficiently to prevent the barn being racked by the wind.


BARN NO. 6

16-sided.

Built, 1888.

[Illustration: FIG. 41. BARN NO. 6; 85 FEET IN DIAMETER; SAME SCALE AS
DRAWING ON OPPOSITE PAGE.]

Diameter, 85 feet.

Height, 26-foot posts on 9-foot wall.

Capacity, 88 cows; 350 tons of hay.

Foundation and first story, cement wall 9 feet above cement floor.

Supports, 4 × 8s, placed just back of stanchions, 3 feet on center.

Studs, 2 × 10s, 26 feet long, placed 2-1/2 feet on center.

Joists 3 × 12s, 20 feet long, 14 inches on center for main span.

Rafters, self-supporting. Sheathed with 1 × 6s with no space between.
This roof has a purline plate thrown in the gambrel. The plate is
supported only by the braces which tie the joints.

[Illustration: FIG. 42. ARRANGEMENT OF COW STABLE IN BARN NO. 6.]

The barn has been racked three times by the wind, replumbed and heavy
iron rods put in to brace it, yet it is out of plumb at the present
time.




CONCLUSIONS


In summing up the data given in this bulletin, it is obvious that the
advantages of the round barn are convenience, strength, and cheapness.

The round barn is the more convenient, because of the unobstructed mow,
which reduces the labor required in mowing hay, and because of the
greater ease and fewer steps with which the feed can be gotten to the
cows, owing to the central location of the supply.

The circular construction is the strongest because advantage is taken of
the lineal strength of the lumber. All exposed surfaces are circular,
and withstand greater wind pressure, as the wind can get no direct hold,
as on the sides or gable ends of a rectangular barn.

In round numbers, rectangular barns require, according to their
construction, from 34 to 58 percent more in cost of material than round
barns with the same floor area and built of the same grade of material.

       *       *       *       *       *

TRANSCRIBER NOTES:

    Punctuation has been normalized without note.

    Hyphenation of words has been changed to be more consistent
    throughout the text.

    Page 6: "betwen" changed to "between" (midway between the silo and
    the outside wall).