Visiting the Facilities

[jwv]

In researching toilets (I get all the really good jobs   ) for the house I found this very interesting site.  It's fun to read about soy paste and how they try to be very delicate about the issue at hand-how much crap can be flushed!  Being a nurse, I'm used to much more graphic descriptions of bodily functions. Right Sassy, MIEDRN?   I will pay top dollar to not have to ever use a plunger again.

Anyway, here's the site  http://www.cuwcc.org/MaPTesting.lasso

And yes, I am full of it!   [smiley=wink.gif]

Judy

[glenn kangiser]

Nurses are hard to gross out --- but I manage every once in a while.

Great Data, Judy.  

[Sassy]

Yeh, we see it all!           And yes, Glenn does manage to gross me out on occasion...  

[Miedrn]

I wasn't sure what this post was about when I clicked on it..........makes sense now!

Thanks for the link. I'll need it sooner or later! Soy paste? I haven't had time to read it but I bet I'll get a chuckle!

[glenn kangiser]

On further study of the testing Judy, I would have to question the validity of the data.  It appears that the soy paste facsimiles were only 1/4 the size of a normal BM. :-/

Now where did you put that plunger?

[glenn kangiser]

Just kidding around ---- The data is good --- they were pretty fair sized --  

[jwv]

Now Glenn, here are the facts:

2.2 Minimum Level of Acceptable Performance - Medical Data
A British medical report3 outlines the results of fecal tests completed on 10 male and 10 female
subjects eating normal diets. The study identified the average maximum4 fecal size of the male
participants to be approximately 250 grams and the 95th percentile size to be 305 grams5. The
average maximum for women was slightly less at 237 grams, with the 95th percentile at 275
grams. The average fecal size of all participants was 130 grams6.
Based on this medical study, it appears that for sanitary reasons, as well as for customer
satisfaction, toilets should flush a minimum of approximately 250 grams of solids. Therefore, for
the purposes of this study, 250 grams (250g) was set as the initial performance benchmark.

(Now there's a study you don't want to be the data collector on  ) What's that sound I hear? Why it's thousands of mouse clicks as people get as fast as possible away from this thread!  

I especially liked the pictures.  And can you imagine:  "What does your mommy (or daddy) do at work?"
'Splain that, Lucy!

Returning to my indepth study of human waste.

Judy

[glenn kangiser]

I don't know, Judy.  

An interestinng note while looking for a conversion table.  http://www.curezone.com/conversions.asp

I found that while the US is content with about a 1/2 lb. average -8 oz.----  the Canadians tend to minimize theirs -- 225 grams while the Australians seem to want to brag that thiers are around 250 grams.    I guess with the internet we are able to communicate faster and find that people all over the world look at things in different ways as well as having different attitudes about it.  The best solution is probably not to look but if we did that how would we find an efficiently flushing toilet.




Note:  You have still not convinced me that 500 grams is not normal. :-/

[Billy Bob]

I have to say I have never quite gotten the general aversion to the subject.  It is a fact of life, and one of those things that persons of all economic and social classes engage in.  Then again, having a bit of a farming background, and thus having to engage the matter on a daily basis during the "formative years", may have coloured my perceptions somewhat.
Please note, Glenn, that the data Judy passed on related to "average maximums", and while the figure you mentioned  would appear to be near the upper end of the Bell distribution curve, it is not neccersarily beyond  statistical range.  They have to have some means to deal with those of us who are more full of it than others, after all. [smiley=2vrolijk_08.gif]

[jwv]

Please note, Glenn, that the data Judy passed on related to "average maximums", and while the figure you mentioned  would appear to be near the upper end of the Bell distribution curve, it is not neccersarily beyond  statistical range.  They have to have some means to deal with those of us who are more full of it than others, after all. [smiley=2vrolijk_08.gif]

What he said!!  [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

Here's a tip, eat more fiber. it'll weigh less.

Judy
now if we ever discuss respiratory secretions and suctioning same, I'm outta here

[glenn kangiser]

Sorry Judy.   I wasn't trying to fix it.  Fiber is my wife's thing.  Give me a big ol' hunk of cheese.  It's kind of a matter of pride to be able to use 5 or 6 flushes without ever destroying the bridge over troubled water.  A guy has to have something special in life to take pride in.  I suppose I could take pride in the knowledge I gained years ago of the proper foods to eat to pass through the stomach undigested so my friendly little family of bacteria will have something to work on.   :-/  

[jwv]

Hey Glenn,

I grew up in the midst of 3 brothers, a dad, 3 male cousins, many uncles, mostly boys in the neighborhood, and now live with 2 sons and a husband--I'm BULLETPROOF.  I earned my stripes by not "running like a girl" or "throwing like a girl" and had to learn to spit and fight.  I cannot be grossed out!! (except the respiratory stuff-yeccchhh )

Judy

but the verbal sparring reminds me of my brothers!

[Dustin]

Ok, let's get serious. I found a very good toilet review site at http://www.terrylove.com/crtoilet.htm
I know, I know, it's hard to stay serious when you're talking about toilet reviews, but there it is. Because of that site I am considering purchasing either the Caroma (very expensive) or the Toto Aquia dual-flush (moderately expensive) system to save on water usage.

[glenn kangiser]

I cannot be grossed out!! (except the respiratory stuff-yeccchhh)

Judy

but the verbal sparring reminds me of my brothers!

OK Sis, I give. :-/

Maybe Sassy can PM you with the respiratory stuff--- I won't even bring it up here. :-/

Dustin, on the more serious side, I recently used a Toto at a motel--- don't recall plugging it.  ------Nope --- it wasn't the Toto----- It was some cheap off brand at a Motel 6.  I left a light on for them.

Please note that I had the dubious honor of using the facilities at the top of the Eiffel Tower in Paris, France.  Did I plug it??? --- no --- I didn't dare.  The French people take great pride in the Eiffel Tower and leave the door open on the front of the public restroom there at the top of the tower---- with a large muscular French lady wrestler (not a 'lady wrestler'-- I mean a mean looking muscular female) - I think she charges the ones she doesn't think are cute---I either didn't have to pay or payed less than Sassy.  I assume she also prevents graffiti and rescues any one in need of it.

[Billy Bob]

I have noticed a few of the presumably water efficient types of commodes in public restrooms do not flush all that efficiently.  The passages apparently have been pared down to maintain pressure with less volume, but consequently don't always let everything through.  They don't plug, exactly, but the water rushes by the "log jam".  A second flush does the trick, but there go your water savings.
I think it is passing strange that, with the data available, the engineers don't do a better job.  Maybe lack of true interest in the project.

[Dustin]

That's often been the issue with some of the american low flush models. They have the same smaller trap that was fine for the big 5 gallon flusher models, just a different tank system. They never bothered to redesign the toilet to support the smaller amounts of water being used. This makes your low flush or dual flush usless, as you need to flush 2 or 3 times to clear the bowl. The Caroma, for instance, has a rather large 4" trapway, so it all goes down quickly and at one time.  The average toilet has a 2" trap.

[Amanda_931]

Billy Bob wrote:

I think it is passing strange that, with the data available, the engineers don't do a better job.  Maybe lack of true interest in the project.

Damn gummint mandates.

(just like those mileage standards for cars.  Back in the early seventies, Honda bought an Impala, tweaked the heads for the early Civic type three-valve cylinders, "balanced and blueprinted" the engine--this was the seventies when that could make a big difference--and probably some other stuff, sent the car back to GM getting 25 mpg. GM was in the process of getting the government to ease up on those impossible standards)

[Billy Bob]

I have to say, Amanda, that is one of those "urban myths".  Think about it... what advantage would it be to Honda to spend a couple of million dollars, ( yes, even back then that's the kind of money you're talking about to totally re-engineer an engine), to clue the competition in to what they're doing wrong?
In addition, as of 2003, the average fuel economy of the Honda fleet lineup was only 29 MPG.  Honda could "tweak" a 1970's Chevy V8 to get 25 MPG, but nearly 30 years of R&D later can only get 29 MPG out of their own four cylinder engines?
In the 1970's Chevrolet, (GM), actually led the industry in expenditures on airflow studies for their head designs.  Unfortunately they were searching for more horsepower at the time.  Maybe they could actually have achieved a 25 MPG V8 if that was the aim.
I'm afraid the 25MPG 70's V8 Impala belongs with the 2006  flex fuel Tahoe that some guy in a blog claims he gets 80MPG, or the well known story of the 100MPG carburetor that: the government,or the oil companies, or Detroit, depending on the version of the story, tracked down and supressed.
Anybody who could do one of these things would be far and away the wealthiest individual in the world.

[glenn kangiser]

I built a vaporizer per a customers design back in the 70's to make the 100 mpg carbuerator.  It worked but mpg unknown to me, no speed - no power- not enough heat in the engine to warm the block.  Maybe others did better but an engineer friend said it was not possible.

[Billy Bob]

You have pointed out a failure on my part, Glenn!  [smiley=embarassed.gif]
I did make a sweeping generalization or two there.  It is not impossible to make a 100 mpg carb., etc., just impossible to make one that results in a practical, driveable automobile!
It's like the RD350 Yamaha motorcycle I used to own.  The promo at the time indicated it had phenomenal performance, which it did, and that it got 90MPG, which it could... they just didn't tell you it wouldn't do both at the same time, or with the same set of jets!  Or my 1972 Datsun 510 sedan;  the car was capable of terrific performance..... IF it had the correct head.  To meet the emmissions standards of the time the company "detuned" the US versions by shipping them with, if I recall, a 1200cc design head.  Back then it was no big deal to swap heads and go racing. (Check out the record of Bob Sharp racing back then).
So I guess it isn't impossible for the 100MPG carb. to have gotten out, but it would have been noticed right away.  Gasoline has a finite amount of energy per unit of volume, and to get performance AS WELL as tremendous economy would require better than 100% efficiency.  I know there's all kinds of talk these days, particularly in sports and politics, about "giving 110%", etc.  , but you really can't give more than 100% because all of something is, well, all there is.  In mechanical systems, if you get 85%, you are doing phenomenally well.

[jwv]

Ok, let's get serious. I found a very good toilet review site at http://www.terrylove.com/crtoilet.htm
I know, I know, it's hard to stay serious when you're talking about toilet reviews, but there it is. Because of that site I am considering purchasing either the Caroma (very expensive) or the Toto Aquia dual-flush (moderately expensive) system to save on water usage.

But Dustin, it was fun!!  

I've used Terry Love's site also-and I'm trying to decide between the 2 toilets you mention.  I like the dual flush

Judy

[Amanda_931]

I've never been sure if it was an urban myth or not.  It seemed pretty reasonable to me.  (Snopes has got a couple of outrageous systems, but not this)

I saw it written up in Hot Rod magazine.

Honda bought an off the showroom floor car.  Balance and Blueprint.  Different carburetor/intake manifold, exhaust headers, maybe a fancy distributor--pretty much available at your friendly local speed shop--those steps would have probably accounted for half or more of the mileage increase.  People were doing this in their back yards, with help from the friendly local machine shop.  This kind of precision machine work was what GM was whining about--oh, but none of our &$##@!! union people can do this kind of work--never mind that they surely had their share of drag and circle track people working for them.

Three valve "stratified charge" was what Honda was using at the time (and probably anxious for other people to license from them), so it was, for them proven technology.  They might have been able to buy un-machined heads for a widely used GM engine from some hot-rod company.

And Honda stood to gain if GM lost in their effort to have the congress roll back those mileage/pollution standards.  They were just starting to enter the U.S. car market, so this made for lots of free advertising, especially to keep GM from entering the Japanese market.

(did they also play with shocks, wheel/tire combinations, gear ratios, etc.  Don't know--people, including the car companies--are sure doing it now)

The mileage was only a mile or two better than the proposed standards, but nowhere near the Prius, expertly driven.

(When I finally saw one of those extra intake valves, my first thought was, could you make a 16-penny nail work for one?)

[glenn kangiser]

I've gotta admit, Billy Bob, Amanda is one of the few girls I know who knows an intake valve from a carbuerator.  

[glenn kangiser]

I like the dual flush

Judy

I didn't check that out--- is that where you have to grab the plunger with both hands?  .... or just flush twice..... many times that won't even do the trick.   Sorry Dustin --- I couldn't resist posting a little more crap.

Reminds me of Thomas Crapper.  Was he real? http://www.theplumber.com/crapper.html

The company is real.

http://www.thomas-crapper.com/

[glenn-k]

Hate to see this thread being so sluggish.  Toilet 101 for computer people.