OT: Toilets and turds

[Jim K..]

Regurgitates it often enough...

[Jim K..]

What is your annual water *supply* bill?

[Jim K..]

Costa del Wolverhampton, worst of both worlds?

[Jim K..]

I think it should up the dose massively & visit a nice high bridge ...

[Scott]

Are modern toilets less efficient than old ones or do turds get larger with age? I have noticed that quite often the toilet fails to flush successfully.

[Max Demian]

Namby-pamby greenies wanting to save water, as if two thirds of the planet isn't covered in the stuff.

[The Natural Philosopher]

There is a resdonable excuse for not having mega flush water toilets as most people do not live in the sea.

[Jethro_uk]

Am I correct in assuming that low flush cisterns need to be matched to the appropriate bowl ?

I think there are a lot of bodgit plumbers (I'm assuming there are also non-bodgit ones ???) that fit low-flush cisterns without checking the match with the end result a lot of householders blame the cistern, not the plumber.

FWIW I fitted a matched set, and even the *hugest* of turns - like the top foot of a walking stick - get flushed perfectly.

[Richard]

Mine seems ok.

Never kept any for long enough to notice.

[Chris Hogg]

Very probably. The dimensions of solid particles that can be transported by flowing water depends of the velocity of the water.

If you put a small cistern on an older loo with a large throat, the water velocity in the throat will not be as great as with the older, larger cistern. To restore the water velocity to that which can transport the same sized solids (in this case, turds) as before, you need to narrow the throat of the loo. When I had an older loo/cistern combo replaced by a modern water-saving version - the throat of the new loo was noticeably smaller, and I assume the above was the explanation.

But it does raise the question as to what happens 'round the bend', as that pipework doesn't get changed. Are there more reports of blockages these days? Fatburgs, turdburgs etc, because there's less water being discharged?

[DerbyBorn]

The Natural Philosopher [e-mail] wrote in news:qcgdfb$h9a$1 @dont-email.me:

Who flushes with seawater?

[John Rumm]

Yes, definitely. A modern bowl design with low volume flush can work well. However an older design intended for use with much larger flush volumes, can lose performance quite significantly when paired with a modern cistern.

It might also be the end user not wanting the expense or upheaval of changing the pan as well as the cistern.

And there was a mental image I could have done without :-))

[charles]

perhaps we need a sea water main system for toilet flushing? I can see one minor problem - you then couldn't put sewage outfall into the rivers.

[Andrew]

You forgot to wrap it up well with wet wipes ;-)

[Pamela]

Is there a danger that the reduced volume of water from the cistern doesn't push the solids along the horizontal underground waste pipe (leading into into the main household waste pipe)?

I have a bathroom which sometimes doesn't get used for days at a time and wonder if the solids from the toilet there might stick halfway along in the waste pipe which is about 8 metres long and dry out.

[Jethro_uk]

Is it *volume* of water that does that ? There's also gravity ?

Are there not other biological processes going on too ? Anaerobic bacteria or something ?

[Pamela]

How significant is that downward slope for an underground soil pipe? I imagine it's not much more than a drop of 1 in 20.

I don't know but, if it's not getting much use, I flush that toilet from time to time to let the water run along the soil pipe. Is this necessary?

[ARW]

:-)

[Scott]

You mean, you don't photograph your finest :-)

[Marland]

The 30,000 or so people on Gibraltar, as fresh water is a limited resource and relies on desalination due to political circumstances so almost every building is connected to a sea water main as well as a potable supply. The fire hydrants in the streets are also connected to it as are some residents swimming pools, Tariffs for potable vary with use and user but for swimming pool use it is £1.38 for a 100 litres , so using the salt supply where the fee is based on rateable value gives quite a saving.

Obviously the UK isn?t that short of fresh water so unlikely to happen here.

GH