Hello Dear SuSanA...

Today, flush toilets are used by millions of people worldwide following the invention by the British in early 20th century. Flush toilets have the ability to remove both solid and liquid waste from the house. This is one advantage that has allowed them prime places in our homes, restaurants, and eateries where hygiene is of upmost importance.

Although modern flush systems have familiarized us with flush AKA flushing toilets , you need to be abreast with innovations and special features that make the best flushing toilets in the market. It’s important that you get the basics right because intricate details like the size, shape, height, and flush power can affect its performance and your overall utility bills.

Keep reading if you are currently on the lookout for cutting-edge flushing toilets or you’d like to know what things to know to ensure you buy the right one.

Thank you so much

Dear SuSanA Member SantaCruz and All.

In certain flood affected areas, communities face similar problem of FS not getting flushed out in low flow volumes and hence resort to multiple hardy solutions and not comfortable. 

As the food intake and produce of FS are related some what, a certain thought  process has gone  in this analysis and assessment. 
And that it deals with known members in a HH Etc.
Ie.. 
The FS as released by members of communities are to be maintained in a form , easily flushed out in one low flush flow release in toilet .

This might not  find many takers, but a thought process can be done.
After- all by tweaking nutrition - al requirement, if the solution is got.. It's fine.. 
The FS released by Members of are monitored and adapted to suit the desired need.

Issued in the interest of affected communities for an eco- friendly solution..
Well wishes.
Prof Ajit Seshadri 
The Vigyan Vijay Foundation Ngo, 

I am currently working on a pilot project to introduce container-based sanitation in rural mountain communities impacted by the devastating wild fires in California. Due to drought conditions, some communities in Northern California have run out of water to operate flush toilets — and water deliveries have become more expensive. People are looking for alternatives to installing expensive septic system upgrades which current building regulations require. Port-a-potties are a terrible short-term solution. 

In many rural and mountain communities, aging and obsolete septic systems are sensitive and pollute the groundwater. California has mandated the use of low-flush toilets, thus these toilets can require multiple flushes to clear the bowl contents. The use of non-septic friendly papers and wipes also contributes to these operational problems. I think we need to look beyond the toilet bowl when talking about operating systems and the unsustainable waste water paradigm in the Western United States, which is severely impacted by drought. Like South Africa, we anticipate the real threat of Day Zero events, now and in the near future. We're finally questioning the insanity of using clean water to flush toilets, the enormous cost of maintaining this infrastructure, and the urgent need for more affordable sanitation solutions for tiny homes, emergency contexts, outdoor recreational spaces, and our rural and mountain communities. 

Sometimes Heberglocke/Siphon Bell is not working properly in the Toilet Flush tank. 'Heberglocke' lifts up and allows water to flow into the toilet. and then it does not come back to its original position water keeps flowing into the toilet and then the tank does not get filled up. For this, you must change your valve and ball. call the emergency plumber or do it yourself by just off the water, unscrewing the pipe and mount, and replacing the new one.

I have been finding this thread very interesting. When Kai first told me about relatively frequent problems with flush toilets in the US by e-mail, I found it hard to believe and thought he was too biased towards dry toilets.
(even though on my trip to Toronto last summer, I did manage to end up with a blocked toilet after a simple act of straight-forward defecation and was totally shocked how this could have happened, as I had never ever had a blocked toilet at home in Germany; my rellies then told me it happens in these so called "condos" (multi-storey appartment buildings) all the time. Go figure).

I mean, a country that technologically advanced as the US (space missions, IT advances, health advances etc.) would surely not have a problem with getting their flush toilets to do reliably what they should be doing: flushing the waste away!?

But apparently not so, so this is quite intriguing - and should be a bit of an embarrassement to the American people and decision-makers...

(Mughal: the amount of water consuption per day, and the amount of flush water used, is not that relevant here, I don't think, as it seems to come down more to the design of the toilet itself, as well as the piping and the habits of the users. Even the biggest amount of flush water is not going to help when there is a blockage in the pipe. Quite the contrary, it could make things worse, see the picture above of the overflowing toilet which Kai posted.)

If anyone ever comes across some comparative statistics of flush toilet failures from one country to the other please bring them to our attention.

I think this blog post that Kai had provided in his initial post sums it up quite well - enjoy the Australian accent in the video!:
pottygirl.wordpress.com/2011/01/30/why-d...erican-toilets-clog/

After I moved here from Germany I noticed that Americans often have a plunger in their bathrooms. It took me not very long to find out that toilets clog more often in North America than they do in Europe. I didn’t learn about the reason why they clog, until I started ecoTransitions during the drought in 2007, supplying Australian designed Caroma Dual Flush toilets to Georgians. It’s a matter of design, trap way size and flush method.

Standard US toilets clear the bowl with siphon technology, so the waste in the bowl gets pulled into the drain and out into the trap way. In order to create this siphon action, the trap way needs to be as narrow as possible, usually around 2 to 2 3/4 inches. You can see how siphon vs. washdown technology works here

Although most of the time this flushing method gets rid of the waste efficiently, there is a tendency for blockages to occur in the toilet trap way.

Australian and European designed toilets use a wash down method which “pushes” the waste down, instead of of “pulling” it. This is why European toilets have a larger diameter trap way which results in less clogging.

One drawback wash down toilets have versus siphon models is the smaller water spot in the bowl, which can result in “skid marks” happening on ocassion. So it really comes down to a matter of personal preference. If you are comfortable with getting out a plunger to unclog your toilet every now and again, then stick with an American style toilet. If you have issues with clogged toilets and don’t mind using a toilet brush every now and then an Australian or European style model may work better for you.

For me, I definetely prefer the European style flush toilet, if it has to be a flush toilet - or of course a urine-diverting dry toilet which has neither clogging nor skid marks.

Dear Kai,

These are localized problems, which you have mentioned, that occur in flush toilet systems. I would not magnify them to a large scale, as the caption of this thread suggests. Common factors that cause problems include discarding sufficiently large objects in toilets, improper WC design and, inadequate gradient.

US cities have very high water consumption per capita per day. In LA, it is 230 gallons per capita per day (gpcd), while in Karachi, it is less than 30 gpcd. So, theoretically, Karachi should be more problem to problems associated with flush systems.

Regards,

F H Mughal

Hi Kai and others,

Thanks for the interesting topic. I recognise and have come across/heard of the issues with flush toilets that you mention, in Africa as well as in Europe. I haven't got any experience with operating problems in the US/ LA, but have experienced the considerable flush volumes.

Apart from the design of the toilet, which in turn determines the amount of flush water needed (see below as well), other aspects are also relevant here. These are design of the plumbing system within the house (slope and diameter of pipes, distances to and from other branch junctions and wastewater producing facilities in the building, and the ventilation system of the plumbing), as well as the design and condition of the sewage system, as mentioned before (tree roots, movement of earth, collapsing of pipes etc). If the ventilation of the plumbing system is not in order, a large flush volume can result in air being trapped in the system, thus blocking the sewage pipe. Sharp turns in combination with large volumes and small pipes are also great ingredients for a blockage.

In fact, I talked to a sewage maintenance company the other day who mentioned that they recently removed half a surfboard (!!) from the sewage system. How that got in there is unknown, but people somehow manage to flush all sorts of stuff down the toilet/drain. Schiphol Airport (Amsterdam) mentioned that they priodically remove winter coats and other large items from their plumbing systems..

Back flushing can also occur when the precipitation intensity exceeds the capacity of the sewage system, of somehow rain (or surface) water is also collected here. This is one of the reasons why in the Netherlands rainwater drainage and sewage systems are being separated. Before rain and wastewater were removed in one pipe, resulting in overflows into surface waterbodies, streets and houses...

So operating problems with flush toilets can't always be solely attributed to a flush toilet or its poor design-other factors can play a large role here too.

Nevertheless, the design of the toilet is important for lessening flush-water demand, which favours treatment and resource recovery. The objective of the flush water is to flush away the faeces and renew the water in the siphon. In lessening flush water volume the latter is the major challenge. In our search for a conventional ‘ultra-water-saving’ flush toilet we have found that at the moment at least 3.5 litres is needed to renew the water in the siphon, if one is not making use of a pressure or vacuum system. These toilets seem to work very well and have not given problems over the past 1.5 years.

Although the toilet manufacturing sector is conservative, innovations regarding spread of pathogens (control of water flow and spashing, rimfree toilets) and water saving are occurring, albeit it perhaps being at a bit too slow a pace...

Kind regards,
Tiemen

Chris - Thanks for adding these insights! As you may recall I was actually the one who added the language and citation detailing the health risks associated with flushing flush toilets to the UDDT Wikipedia page:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urine-diverting_dry_toilet#Health_aspects

In addition, I also advocated for and did everything I could to, as you put it, "add discouraging words about flush toilets" to the UDDT article. However, in the end, those of us who spent the most time working on it decided that the place to really do this is the article dedicated to flush toilets. So, I encourage you to contribute this yourself since I am aware that you're also registered on Wikipedia and helped some with the updates. I am excited to read what you add!

And for what its worth, I'd planned to add what I've learned in this thread to the flush toilet article but had to reconsider upon discovering that at least some of it already exists:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flush_toilet#Flachsp.C3.BCler

I'll review more and see if there's anything else that could stand to be added.

Dear Kai,

Must say that In cannot recall ever having a blocked flushing toilet in Europe. In South Asia on the other hand...

I guess in this part of the world filled-up septic tanks, small diameter pipes, bad workmanship and flushing of non-flushable items would mainly be to blame.

Regards

Marijn

Hi Kai,

I have found flush toilets to fail pretty often, both in the US and Latin America. One never knows the exact causes, but I suspect large, solid feces or children throwing things into the toilets. One then needs to try to unblog the toilet with the rubber plunger, with almost inevitable splashing and sometimes overflowing.

Remember that even if flush toilets do not get plugged, they emit plumes of microscopic droplets of fecally contaminated water that drift through the bathrooms and land on people's toothbrushes. (People should learn to close the lid before flushing, although I guess that almost no one does that, because they want to see if everything has gone away).

Also remember that the wet surfaces of a flush toilet are much more amenable to pathogen survival, compared to the pile of dry soil, etc., in a UDDT.

I invite everyone to see the relevant papers that I cite in this interview:
www.chekhovskalashnikov.com/water-sanitation/

I encourage us to put discouraging words about flush toilets on the UDDT Wikipedia page. People tend to be brainwashed that flush toilets are the only civilized option, so it is worthwhile to shake up this mindset whenever possible.

Best wishes,
Chris Canaday

Dennis - I think that you're on to something here.

Based upon my own personal travel experience (and on the photos that some of the links that I earlier provided contain) the design of the bowls are very different. The bowls of "euro-toilets" (for lack of a better term) are more compartmentalized and feature the drain at the front followed in the back by a gradually sloping surface that slopes towards the front, the latter of which is all located above the waterline. The drain at the front is centered in a small basin that contain a small volume of water. Feces deposited into a euro-toilet hits the dry sloping section and is washed downhill towards the front of the bowl (and ultimately to the drain) by the gravitational action of the flush water.

In marked contrast, North American flush toilets (& I'm guessing South American too?) feature an un-compartmentalized step-sided bowl with the drain located at the rear and marked by a basin that encompasses the total volume of the bowl and which contains, in some cases, a relatively large volume of water (this being even more pronounced in older full-flush style toilets). A complaint with this style of toilet, and as is frequently made by folks who are used to euro-toilets, is that there is a tendency for splash-back when depositing feces; which definitely makes sense given that feces is not only deposited from directly above but also directly into a comparatively large pool of water (not unlike like dropping a handful of small rocks from a height of approximately six inches or 15 centimeters straight down into a bucket containing a few liters of water).

So, enough textual description...here's what I'm talking about:

First, a profile view of a euro-flush toilet:





And, second, a front-left quarter view of a North American flush toilet:





At first glance, I'd wager that its this crucial design difference that plays a large role in the North American prevalence of this:





Having thus ascertained something that may prove important in understanding why we in N. America are not only well acquainted with plungers but also why most or all of us have at one time or another experienced the condition displayed in the above photo, I'd love to know how our two styles of flush toilet bowls came to be; their origins and why ours in N. America persists in spite of itself.

Certainly there must be some flush toilet historian amongst the forum-goers?

Hi Kai

Never had a problem with flush toilets backing up in Australia or Asia I have to say.

Maybe the US cisterns (or systems) are different in some way? Piping, water volumes, other?

Not sure