Link to Faucetology Store LINK to the Toiletology Store

A Toiletology 101 sponsor since 1998
LINK to the Fixitips Store LINK to Ayrlawn Hardware Store
§ Front Door § Intro § Lesson Plan § INDEX § The Toilet Shoppe § Fixitips § HELP § §
Toiletology 101 Logo ... A free course in toilet repair
On The Web Since 1995
Get
 a Quote
Toiletology 101 Ads

Toiletology 101 Ads
 

1.6 Gallon, Low-consumption Toilets

continued ...



Dave Barry, syndicated columnist, on several occasions has poked fun at the Congress for mandating the 1.6 toilets. In one column, Barry challenged his readers to write their "congress-humans" in support of Rep. Knollenberg's bill to change the law. Barry later said that as a result of that column, he got a huge amount of mail, "from Americans who care deeply about the issue of their toilets, and the vast majority of them HATE the new ones." As a result of his taking issue with the legislation, Barry was contacted by a member of Contractors 2000, an association of independent plumbing contractors. He was told that after much testing this association had a toilet they wanted Barry to try. Barry doesn't mention the brand name of the toilet, but he says, "I cannot speak highly enough of this toilet. It is an inspiring example of American ingenuity and engineering know-how." For the name of this toilet, you'll have to write Contractors 2000, 2179 Fourth St., St. Paul, MN, 55110.

On 1 Nov '98, under the title "Maple Leaf Menace for The Washington Post Magazine Barry opens his column by saying, "I say it's time "leaders" in Washington stopped blathering about sex and started paying attention to the issues that really MATTER to this nation, such as whether we should declare war on Canada." He goes on the reveal that Americans are crossing the Canadian border near Detroit to purchase 3.5-gallon-per-flush toilets. Barry rants on in shock that people can simply waltz across our borders with illegal toilets supplied by ruthless Canadian toilet cartels headed by greed-crazed Canadian toilet kingpins who will stop at nothing to push their illicit wares on our vulnerable society.

Fast forward to 10 June 2001. Barry is still ranting against the government attempt to "cripple our toilets". Barry opens his column Wit's End in The Washington Post Sunday Magazine with a warning ... TASTEFULNESS ADVISORY: Do not read this column if you are eating, or plan to eat ever again. Thank you.

Then goes on to explain: "Recently I watched as a professional engineer attempted to flush fermented bean curd down a toilet. This was not some fun engineer prank. This was a laboratory test conducted at the research center of the National Association of Home Builders, which is trying to develop a laboratory test for toilet per-formance that simulates the challenges faced by toilets in the real world".



John O. Nelson, a Civil Engineer, retired manager of a water utility and Warren Liebold who ran New York's toilet replacement program have put together a report of customer satisfaction responses on different ULFT brands by Water Conservation Professionals responding to an e-mail survey from the American Water Works Association's WaterWiser Conference.



WHICH ONE IS BEST ?

Water Management, Inc. Testing Lab
Water Management, Inc. Toilet Testing Labs

Except for the extremely rare situation, the single most cost-effective water efficiency measure centers on the toilet. For this reason, Water Management, Inc. (WMI), (a sponsor of Toiletology 101) has engaged in extensive testing of all types and makes of toilets. They have discovered that certain models by different manufacturers work better than others under specific site conditions. Some models work better than others under high pressure, some designs excel in floor-mounted toilets, but offer rather poorly performing wall mounted models, and vice versa. WMI says, "Almost all models work inefficiently if not maintained or repaired properly. It is extremely easy for maintenance personnel to install the wrong flapper in a tank toilet or the wrong diaphragm in a flushometer valve."

Water Management, Inc. designs and implements water efficiency programs for Multi-unit Residential Properties, Public Housing Authorities, Federal and State Facilities, Military Complexes, Hotel, Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional properties. The majority of their business comes from long-term, performance-based programs in which their compensation is based on a share of the savings generated by their work. This long-term orientation guides every decision they make; their bottom line depends on quality equipment being installed.




NOTE: If at all possible try to use a toilet under live conditions before you commit to buying it. Some of the pressure assisted toilets are quite noisy.



http://www.denverwater.org/cons_xeriscape/conservation/pdfs/mapdata.pdf Maximum Performance (MaP) of Toilet Fixtures - Sorted by Manufacturer http://www.cwwa.ca/pdf_files/Map%2011th%20Edition%20Full%20Report1.pdf Important: This report, originally published in 2003 with the test results for the initial group of toilet fixtures, is periodically updated (approximately every four to six months) and made available free-ofcharge on the websites of the Canadian Water and Wastewater Association (CWWA), the California Urban Water Conservation Council (CUWCC), the U.S.-Canadian Alliance for Water Efficiency (AWE) and Veritec Consulting Inc. (see web addresses below). Individual agencies, municipalities, green building organizations, publications, and manufacturers are free to link to these sites provided credit is given to the authors. http://www.cwwa.ca/freepub_e.asp http://www.cuwcc.org/MapTesting.lasso http://www.allianceforwaterefficiency.org http://veritec.ca http://www.cwwa.ca/pdf_files/MAP%2013th%20Edition%20-%20February%202009.pdf 1.0 BACKGROUND Although virtually all toilet models sold in Canada and the U.S. meet both the flush volume and performance requirements of the Canadian Standards Association (CSA) and the American National Standards Institute/American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ANSI/ASME), there remains some question as to whether models that meet the minimum certification requirements also meet the expectations of the consumer. What’s more, since certification testing offers only a pass/fail grading, there is currently no easy way to distinguish between superior and marginal toilet models available in the market. Most toilet fixtures destined for residential and light commercial applications exceed customer performance expectations while flushing with no more than 6 litres (1.6 gallons). However, research concluded that there were also some certified and commercially available models that do not meet customer expectations. There are two key concerns: 1) Fixtures that fail to meet the 6-litre maximum flush requirements of the CSA or the 1.6- gallon requirements of the ANSI/ASME1 result in toilets that flush with either too much or too little water; and 2) Fixtures that do not flush effectively usually result in customer complaints and occasionally the need for double flushing. Until 2003, however, there was no convenient way for the customer to readily distinguish between good and marginal performers. In addition, this lack of information on toilet performance levels created a negative perception regarding all 6-litre (1.6-gallon) fixtures in general. Instead, we believe that these negative perceptions should be focused only on those toilet fixtures clearly identified (through testing) as the “bad apples”. Fortunately, the plumbing industry responded positively to the performance issues of the past. The fixtures available in the marketplace today are significantly better performers than those MaP tested as recently as 2003. Much of this improved performance can be attributed to the MaP test and its acceptance by the marketplace. Plumbing manufacturers are to be commended for developing and delivering outstanding toilet fixtures to the marketplace today. We would hope that the negative reputation of 6L (1.6g) toilet fixtures gained in the 1990s would be entirely “flushed away” by the current generation of superior product. Although other toilet performance studies have been completed, none of them was performed using test media as realistic as that used in this test, nor has a quantifiable performance benchmark – based on the results of relevant medical data – been established. We developed the Maximum Performance (MaP) testing to identify how well popular toilets models perform bulk removal using a realistic test media, and to grade each toilet model based on this performance. A soybean paste having similar physical properties (density, moisture content) to human waste was used in combination with toilet paper as the test media. In addition to using a realistic test media, all toilet samples are adjusted, where possible, to their rated flush volume (typically 6 litres / 1.6 gallons) prior to testing to ensure a level playing field. The original testing protocol required the soybean paste to be extruded through a 7/8-inch (22- mm) die and cut into 50-gram specimens (each specimen approximately 100 mm or 4 inches in length). Toilet models were subjected to progressively larger loadings (in 50-gram increments) until the unit failed to completely clear the bowl in two of three attempts, or to fully restore a 1 Certification testing is intended to ensure that each model meets a specific set of minimum requirements for health and safety, product integrity, and performance. There is no differentiation in certification between a toilet model that just meets the minimum requirements and one that surpasses those requirements. minimum 50mm (2-in.) trap seal. Beginning with the 6th Edition of this report, the soybean paste media has been encased as described in the test protocol (Appendix A). However, organizations applying to have a fixture tested are now given the option of choosing either the new encased test media OR the original uncased test media. This 13th Edition of the MaP testing report supersedes all earlier editions. Approximately 140 new toilet fixture models are added in this edition (a number of which replaced models in the 11th Edition), bringing the total to nearly 730 different models measured for their flush performance. Also, in accordance with the terms of MaP testing developed by the authors, all models that were tested more than four years prior to this report were deleted from the report. (Some previously tested models have been re-tested or discontinued by their manufacturer and also deleted from the report.) Beginning with the 4th Edition only a single sample of each toilet model was required to be submitted for testing (previous requirement was two samples). This change was made because of the relative consistency in model performance noted in earlier MaP testing and to better align MaP testing requirements with those of other testing agencies. The original MaP report (2003) contained information on replacement flapper interchangeability. Information on checking and replacing toilet flappers can now be found on the web at: www.toiletflapper.org. Whereas MaP testing is strictly performance-related, it is also considered important that those toilet models subsidized by water utilities (e.g., through rebate or other programs) sustain their water savings over the life of the fixture. The L.A. Supplemental Purchase Specification (SPS) was developed for this purpose and may currently be found at: http://www.cuwcc.org/toilet_fixtures/LADWP_SPS_ULFTReqs_05-11-16.pdf The original minimum performance benchmark adopted by MaP was 250 grams (250g) of waste. That is, a toilet fixture should completely evacuate at least 250g of waste from the fixture in a single flush action. This value is based on the results of a British medical study (Variability of Colonic Function in Healthy Subjects) that identified 250g as the average maximum fecal size of the male participants in the study. Thus, any toilet that meets or exceeds the 250g performance threshold should meet customer expectations for flushing. Overall, the MaP testing protocol has been very well-received by consumers, water providers, architects and engineers, specifiers, builders, retailers, and manufacturers alike. Many water agencies and municipalities in the U.S. and Canada consider the results of MaP testing when evaluating which toilet models to promote, subsidize, or rebate. It is important to note that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has also adopted 350g as the minimum performance threshold for high-efficiency toilets (HETs) promoted within its new WaterSense program. Furthermore, most water utilities currently adopting toilet replacement rebate and installation programs (with HETs) are also establishing their minimum performance threshold at 350g (some are as high as 500g). Therefore, for the sake of consistency, the requirements for UNAR (Uniform North American Requirements) for toilet fixtures, which is virtually identical to the EPA’s WaterSense program2 for high-efficiency models, has likewise adopted 350g as the minimum flushing performance threshold. The EPA’s WaterSense program does not post performance scores for included toilet models; models are simply certified as meeting the WaterSense requirements on a pass-fail basis, which include the 350g threshold and other criteria. Independent of WaterSense, however, we will continue to perform and report on MaP testing results via reports such as this. 2 Except that the WaterSense program confines its labeling to HETs ONLY. WaterSense and its toilet specification may be accessed at: http://www.epa.gov/watersense/ Money down the drain

For those of you who are in the market for a new toilet, you'll find information on 13 low-flush toilets from eight of the leading manufacturers ($75 to $940) in the May 1998 issue of Consumer Reports (P.O.Box 53029, Boulder, CO 80322-3029) on page 44. "In search of a better toilet" gives an explanation for the differences among the gravity-flush, the pressure-assisted, the pump assisted, and the vacuum-assisted; these are the different types of toilets available today in the U.S. The engineers at the Consumer Report lab consider the Gerber Ultra Flush the best value and highest performing toilet of the thirteen they tested.

The last time Consumer Reports tested toilets was for their February 1995 issue. The report is now several years old, regardless, it is still worth reviewing (check it out at your public library.) The report rates 32 brands or models that range in price from $65 to $815 for waste-removal, dilution, wash down, soiling and odors, drain carry and noise. Eight of the top ten toilets are pressure-assisted rather than the gravity-flow that is the traditional technology. The report includes a sidebar with the telephone numbers for 12 manufacturers of the low-consumption toilets mentioned in the article.

Click to Save: 41% on 8 issues/12 months of Fine Homebuilding Magazine

According to an article in Fine Homebuilding Magazine Thomas Pape, chairman of the Indoor Plumbing Committee for the American Waterworks Association Conservation Committee, says homeowners should consider buying the rounded-bowl toilets instead of the elongated variety. "These just seems to work better than the elongated bowl," according to Pape. "That's especially true in a setting that might be abusive. You get a better vortex action out of a round bowl."




"Low Consumption Toilets" continues on
Page   1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6




Translate this page.








 


Plumbing
Products
American Standard ProductsAmerican Standard Products
Kohler ProductsKohler Products
TOTO ProductsTOTO Products
Eljer ProductsEljer Products
Crane ProductsCrane Products
Briggs ProductsBriggs Products
Sloan ProductsSloan Products
Raised ToiletsRaised Toilets
Fluidmaster Products
Mansfield Plumbing ProductsMansfield Plumbing Products
Plumbing Repair PartsPlumbing Repair Parts
Toilet FlappersToilet Flappers
Toilet BallcocksToilet Ballcocks
Toilet Flush ValvesToilet Flush Valves
Toilet SeatsToilet Seats
Toilet Tissue HoldersToilet Tissue Holders
OuthousesOuthouses
LeakFrog® is the small water alarm with a big job. Behind the cute smile is a brain that knows when you have a water problem. Water causes more damage annually than smoke, and the mold that occurs after a water leak can be deadly.
Return to:   § Front Door   § Intro   § Lesson Plan   § INDEX   § The Toilet Shoppe    § Fixitips   § HELP    §


Disclaimer: Information provided in these documents is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind,
either expressed or implied, including but not limited to the implied warranties
of fitness for a particular purpose.


Privacy Policy

Toiletology 101 ~~ http://www.toiletology.com/
© Copyright 1996 - 2010     by Kay Keating
Hosted by Datah.com
Marketing & Sales by
Jay Keating & Associates

Email Jay Keating