A COMPARATIVE EVALUATION of BOAEROSOLS BETWEEN VACUUM and GRAVITY TOILETS. by Elizabeth Nyarkoa Osei a Research Dissertation

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

A COMPARATIVE EVALUATION of BOAEROSOLS BETWEEN VACUUM and GRAVITY TOILETS. by Elizabeth Nyarkoa Osei a Research Dissertation A COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF BOAEROSOLS BETWEEN VACUUM AND GRAVITY TOILETS. by Elizabeth Nyarkoa Osei A research dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the award of the degree of Master of Science at Loughborough University August 2019 Supervisors: Professor M. Sohail Khan Dr. Sola Afolabi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am grateful to God for granting me good health to complete this dissertation. I would like to express my sincerest gratitude to the following people, for their immense support and encouragement which have helped make this project a success: • My family • My Supervisors, Professor Sohail M. Khan and Dr. Sola Afolabi • Lorraine Withers, Andrew Hay, Kris Wojcik and the entire team at Otter Vacuum Systems • Mrs Jayshree Bhuptani • Mr. Bernard Agyeman • Mr. Kobina Paintsil • The entire WEDC class of 2019. i ABSTRACT Toilet flushing is known to generate and disperse bioaerosols which can contaminate surfaces in the washroom and increase the risk of infections through contact with the contaminated surfaces or inhalation of these bioaerosols. Whilst this phenomenon is well known for gravity toilets, vacuum toilets have been hypothesized not to generate bioaerosols and have been tagged as more sanitary compared to the gravity toilet. This study investigates whether a vacuum toilet produces bioaerosols and how the bioaerosols and particle concentrations of a vacuum and a gravity toilet differ from each other. The study further looks into the reasons and behaviour of the measured concentrations based on the main difference between the toilets - their flushing mechanism. Experiments were conducted in a warehouse-office building using two identical toilet cubicles with dimensions of 1.5 meters by 1.17 meters which were constructed for the purposes of this study. 12 experimental conditions this were framed around two main toilet-use scenarios; using the toilet during an incidence of diarrhea and using the toilet when there was no diarrhea (faecal matter of solid consistency). Faecal matter was not used in this study; rather, Escherichia coli bacteria, an indicator organism for faecal contamination on surfaces and in toilet water was used in seeding the toilet bowls to represent the experimental conditions in the study. The bioaerosol concentrations in this study were measured according to the ACGIH and ASTM standards. Particle concentrations were measured using an optical particle counter. Based on the results of this study, it can be concluded that, gravity toilets produce bioaerosols via visible splashes or overspray when faecal matter of loose or solid consistency is flushed with the lid open, but a vacuum toilet would not produce bioaerosols or visible splashes under the same conditions. Keywords: Bioaerosols, Toilet Plume, Gravity-Flush Toilets, Vacuum Toilets, Droplet Nuclei, Bioaerosol Sampling. iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The aim of this research is to generate quantitative and qualitative evidence to test the hypothesis that, gravity toilets produce toilet plume which contains bioaerosols when flushed but vacuum toilets do not produce toilet plume which contains bioaerosols when flushed. Toilet flushing is the most common source of bioaerosols in indoor settings (Darlow and Bale, 1959). Even though the microbiological profiles of bioaerosols differ from setting to setting, bioaerosols are usually made up of high concentrations of bacteria and fungi (Zemouri et al., 2017). Literature review alone cannot provide enough qualitative and quantitative data to compare bioaerosol and particle concentrations between gravity and vacuum toilets. It was therefore necessary to supplement data collection with experiments to generate enough quantitative data for the testing of the hypothesis of this study, and qualitative data to support the results of the hypothesis test. The experiments for this study were conducted in a warehouse-office building. For the purpose of this study only, two identical toilet cubicles with dimensions of 1.5 meters by 1.17 meters were constructed in a large storage room on the site where the experiments were to be conducted. The experimental conditions for this study, labelled A-L, were chosen to represent the several scenarios which may exist in an actual toilet cubicle which is left idle or in use. The conditions were then framed around two main toilet-use scenarios; using the toilet during an incidence of diarrhea and using the toilet when there was no diarrhea (faecal matter of solid consistency). Faecal matter was not used for the experiments in this study; instead, Escherichia coli bacteria, an indicator organism for faecal contamination on surfaces and in water was used. To determine the concentration Escherichia coli that would be seeded into the toilets, a membrane filtration test was performed for successive dilutions of the E. coli broth used in this study. The procedure used for measuring bioaerosol concentrations in this study are according to the ACGIH (1999) and ASTM (2019) standards and guidelines for collecting culturable aerosolized v bacteria unto agar plates using inertial impaction for indoor air quality investigations. A total of 56 trials were conducted across all the experimental conditions for both the gravity and vacuum toilet (28 trials for each toilet). Line, violin, distribution and strip plots were used to observe the distribution of bioaerosol concentrations across the experimental conditions and particle concentrations across the experimental conditions and bin sizes for the two toilet types. A t-test was performed to determine the statistical differences between bioaerosol and particle concentrations at an experimental condition for the test gravity toilet and at the same condition for the test vacuum toilet. Paired t-tests (significance level 5%) were conducted for each toilet type, within pre and post seeding, pre and post flush, lid open and lid closed and first and subsequent flush experimental conditions. For the testing of the hypothesis, separate t-tests were performed using the average bioaerosol and particle concentrations for the flush conditions. The generated p-values were then compared with the desired significance level of the t-test (p=0.05). For the gravity toilet, the agar plates retrieved from the impactor showed growth after the incubation period, for only experimental conditions which included flushing the toilet with the lid open with no disinfection prior to flushing. For the vacuum toilet, all agar plates retrieved from the impactor for all the experimental conditions showed no growth after the 24-hour incubation period. he zero bioaerosol concentrations for the vacuum toilet implies a variance of zero making it deterministic. For the gravity toilet, 75-85% of all the particles generated in each experimental condition were of bin size 0.3 µm or less in all the three minutes of sampling. For the vacuum toilet, 70-81% of all the particles generated in each experimental condition were of bin size 0.3 µm or less in all the three minutes of sampling. For the test gravity toilet, all surfaces tested in experimental conditions A and L (no seeding with E- coli and disinfection prior to flushing) tested negative for E-coli or total coliforms. For the vi test vacuum toilet, all surfaces tested in experimental conditions A and L tested negative for E-coli or total coliforms. Bioaerosol concentration data for the gravity and vacuum toilet suggest that, the vacuum toilet did not produce any significant concentrations of aerosolized E. coli to be captured by the impactor. The only time the vacuum toilet seat was contaminated, were in experimental conditions where the lid was closed, and the toilet was flushed. Flushing with the lid closed contaminates the lid for both vacuum and gravity toilets and this supports the reasoning that the toilet lid may be a source of bacteria and not desirable to touch. For the gravity toilet, subsequent flushes may continue to produce bioaerosols because, bacteria residues may remain in the toilet bowl water and the insides of the bowl after the first flush even though a reduction in the concentration of bowl water contamination by subsequent flushes and hence a proportionate decrease in bioaerosol concentrations was observed. There is no complete vacuum; every vacuum is hypothesized to be made up of appearing and disappearing ghost particles which may interfere with real particles and contradict the contribution of real particles to any space (Sakharov, 1991). Because bacteria had been flushed through the sewer pipes, it cannot be totally overruled that the vacuum sewer pipes were contaminated with bacteria. This could also mean that, particle in the vacuum sewer pipes may have been made up of bacteria in the sewer pipes and the ghost particles mentioned by Sakharov (1991). With this theory and the relatively low vacuum percentage used for the vacuum toilet pump, this study suggests that, the vacuum that existed in the sewer pipes contained bacteria particles which floated (against gravity) into the sampling area anytime the flush button pressed, opening the discharge valve connecting the sewer pipe to the toilet bowl. This could explain why the particle concentrations in the vacuum toilet increased immediately after flush. vii LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1 Outline of research objectives, questions and data collection methods…………………....5 Table 3.1. Experimental conditions and their relevance to the objectives of the study………………15 Table 4.1. Results for hypothesis tests conducted using the particle concentrations for
Recommended publications
  • 248 Cmr: Board of State Examiners of Plumbers and Gas Fitters
    248 CMR: BOARD OF STATE EXAMINERS OF PLUMBERS AND GAS FITTERS 248 CMR 10.00: UNIFORM STATE PLUMBING CODE Section 10.01: Scope and Jurisdiction 10.02: Basic Principles 10.03: Definitions 10.04: Testing and Safety 10.05: General Regulations 10.06: Materials 10.07: Joints and Connections 10.08: Traps and Cleanouts 10.09: Interceptors, Separators, and Holding Tanks 10.10: Plumbing Fixtures 10.11: Hangers and Supports 10.12: Indirect Waste Piping 10.13: Piping and Treatment of Special Hazardous Wastes 10.14: Water Supply and the Water Distribution System 10.15: Sanitary Drainage System 10.16: Vents and Venting 10.17: Storm Drains 10.18: Hospital Fixtures 10.19: Plumbing in Manufactured Homes and Construction Trailers 10.20: Public and Semi-public Swimming Pools 10.21: Boiler Blow-off Tank 10.22: Figures 10.23: Vacuum Drainage Systems 10.01: Scope and Jurisdiction (1) Scope. 248 CMR 10.00 governs the requirements for the installation, alteration, removal, replacement, repair, or construction of all plumbing. (2) Jurisdiction. (a) Nothing in 248 CMR 10.00 shall be construed as applying to: 1. refrigeration; 2. heating; 3. cooling; 4. ventilation or fire sprinkler systems beyond the point where a direct connection is made with the potable water distribution system. (b) Sanitary drains, storm water drains, hazardous waste drainage systems, dedicated systems, potable and non-potable water supply lines and other connections shall be subject to 248 CMR 10.00. 10.02: Basic Principles Founding of Principles. 248 CMR 10.00 is founded upon basic principles which hold that public health, environmental sanitation, and safety can only be achieved through properly designed, acceptably installed, and adequately maintained plumbing systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Priolo® Flowise® 15" Height Elongated Flushometer Toilet VITREOUS CHINA with EVERCLEAN®
    Priolo® FloWise® 15" Height Elongated Flushometer Toilet VITREOUS CHINA with EVERCLEAN® Priolo® FloWise® 15" Height Elongated Flushometer Toilet with EVERCLEAN® • Floor mount rear outlet flushometer valve toilet • Vitreous china • High Efficiency, Low Consumption. Operates in the range of 1.1 gpf to 1.6 gpf (4.2 Lpf to 6.0 Lpf) • Meets definition of HET (High Efficiency Toilet) when used with a high efficiency flush valve (1.28 gpf or 1.6 / 1.1 gpf dual flush) • Permanent EverClean® surface inhibits the growth of stain- and odor-causing bacteria, mold, and mildew on the surface • 15" rim height • Condensation channel • Elongated bowl • Powerful direct-fed siphon jet action • Fully glazed 2-1/8" trapway • 1-1/2" inlet spud • 4 bolt caps ❏ 3690.001 Elongated bowl only, top spud SEE REVERSE FOR ROUGHING-IN DIMENSIONS ❏ 3691.001 Elongated bowl only, top spud with slotted rim for bedpan holding To Be Specified: ❏ Color: ❏ White System MaP* Score: ❏ • 1,000 grams of miso @ 1.6 gpf or 1.28 gpf when Seat: used with an American Standard flush valve ❏ American Standard #5901.110 Heavy duty open front less cover with EverClean® surface * Maximum Performance (MaP) testing performed by IAPMO R&T Lab. MaP Report conducted by Veritec Consulting, Inc. ❏ American Standard #5905.110 Extra heavy duty and Koeller and Company. open front less cover with EverClean® surface ❏ Alternative Seat: Component Parts: ❏ Flushometer Valve: ❏ 047007-0070A Inlet spud (furnished with bowl) ❏ 1.6 gpf: ❏ ® ❏ 481310-0200A Bolt caps with retainers Sensor-Operated: American
    [Show full text]
  • AFWALL® Flowise® ELONGATED FLUSHOMETER TOILET VITREOUS CHINA with EVERCLEAN® BARRIER FREE AFWALL® Flowise® ELONGATED TOILET with EVERCLEAN®
    AFWALL® FloWise® ELONGATED FLUSHOMETER TOILET VITREOUS CHINA with EVERCLEAN® BARRIER FREE AFWALL® FloWise® ELONGATED TOILET with EVERCLEAN® • Wall-mounted flushometer valve toilet • Vitreous china • High Efficiency, Low Consumption. Operates in the range of 1.1 gpf to 1.6 gpf (4.2 Lpf to 6.0 Lpf) • Meets definition of HET (High Efficiency Toilet) when used with a high efficiency flush valve (1.28 gpf or 1.6 / 1.1 gpf dual flush) • Permanent EverClean® surface inhibits the growth of stain- and odor-causing bacteria, mold, and mildew on the surface • Condensation channel • Elongated bowl • Powerful direct-fed siphon jet action • 1-1/2" inlet spud • Fully-glazed 2-1/8" trapway • 10" x 12" water surface area • 100% factory flush tested ❏ 3351.001 Elongated bowl only, top spud SEE REVERSE FOR ROUGHING-IN DIMENSIONS ❏ 3352.001 Elongated bowl only, top spud with slotted rim for bedpan holding (White only) ❏ 3353.001 Elongated bowl only, back spud To Be Specified: ❏ ❏ Color: ❏ White ❏ Bone ❏ Linen 3354.001 Elongated bowl only, back spud with ❏ Seat: slotted rim for bedpan holding (White only) ❏ American Standard #5901.100 Heavy duty open front less cover System MaP* Score: ❏ American Standard #5905.100 Extra heavy • 1,000 grams of miso @ 1.6 gpf or 1.28 gpf when used with an American Standard flush valve duty open front less cover ❏ Flushometer Valve: * Maximum Performance (MaP) testing performed by IAPMO ❏ R&T Lab. MaP Report conducted by Veritec Consulting, Inc. 1.6 gpf: and Koeller and Company. ❏ Sensor-Operated: American Standard Selectronic®
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:2101.11990V1 [Physics.Flu-Dyn] 28 Jan 2021 in the Study Reported That All of the Restroom Surfaces Appeared Teria Recovered from Air Samples
    Aerosol generation in public restrooms Jesse H. Schreck,1, a) Masoud Jahandar Lashaki,2, b) Javad Hashemi,1, c) Manhar Dhanak,1, d) and Siddhartha Verma1, e) 1)Department of Ocean and Mechanical Engineering, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, FL 33431, USA 2)Department of Civil, Environmental and Geomatics Engineering, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, FL 33431, USA (Dated: 29 January 2021) Aerosolized droplets play a central role in the transmission of various infectious diseases, including Legionnaire’s disease, gastroenteritis-causing norovirus, and most recently COVID-19. Respiratory droplets are known to be the most prominent source of transmission for COVID-19, however, alternative routes may exist given the discovery of small numbers of viable viruses in urine and stool samples. Flushing biomatter can lead to the aerosolization of microorganisms, thus, there is a likelihood that bioaerosols generated in public restrooms may pose a concern for the transmission of COVID-19, especially since these areas are relatively confined, experience heavy foot traffic, and may suffer from inadequate ventilation. To quantify the extent of aerosolization, we measure the size and number of droplets generated by flushing toilets and urinals in a public restroom. The results indicate that the particular designs tested in the study generate a large number of droplets in the size range 0:3mm to 3mm, which can reach heights of at least 1:52m. Covering the toilet reduced aerosol levels but did not eliminate them completely, suggesting that aerosolized droplets escaped through small gaps between the cover and the seat. In addition to consistent increases in aerosol levels immediately after flushing, there was a notable rise in ambient aerosol levels due to the accumulation of droplets from multiple flushes conducted during the tests.
    [Show full text]
  • PLUMBING DICTIONARY Sixth Edition
    as to produce smooth threads. 2. An oil or oily preparation used as a cutting fluid espe cially a water-soluble oil (such as a mineral oil containing- a fatty oil) Cut Grooving (cut groov-ing) the process of machining away material, providing a groove into a pipe to allow for a mechani cal coupling to be installed.This process was invented by Victau - lic Corp. in 1925. Cut Grooving is designed for stanard weight- ceives or heavier wall thickness pipe. tetrafluoroethylene (tet-ra-- theseveral lower variouslyterminal, whichshaped re or decalescensecryolite (de-ca-les-cen- ming and flood consisting(cry-o-lite) of sodium-alumi earthfluo-ro-eth-yl-ene) by alternately dam a colorless, thegrooved vapors tools. from 4. anonpressure tool used by se) a decrease in temperaturea mineral nonflammable gas used in mak- metalworkers to shape material thatnum occurs fluoride. while Usedheating for soldermet- ing a stream. See STANK. or the pressure sterilizers, and - spannering heat resistantwrench and(span-ner acid re - conductsto a desired the form vapors. 5. a tooldirectly used al ingthrough copper a rangeand inalloys which when a mixed with phosphoric acid.- wrench)sistant plastics 1. one ofsuch various as teflon. tools to setthe theouter teeth air. of Sometimesaatmosphere circular or exhaust vent. See change in a structure occurs. Also used for soldering alumi forAbbr. tightening, T.F.E. or loosening,chiefly Brit.: orcalled band vapor, saw. steam,6. a tool used to degree of hazard (de-gree stench trap (stench trap) num bronze when mixed with nutsthermal and bolts.expansion 2. (water) straightenLOCAL VENT.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecopower® Flush Valve and in Order to Alert You Possible Personal Injury and Damage to Your Property
    03584T2R v02 2012.01 Warranty ® Owner's ManManualual 1. TOTO® warrants its products to be free from manufacturing defects under normal use and service for a period of three (3) years from the date of purchase. This warranty is extended only to the ORIGINAL NOTE TO INSTALLER : PLEASE GIVE THIS MANUAL TO THE PURCHASER. CUSTOMER AFTER INSTALLATION. 2. TOTO’s® obligations under this warranty are limited to repair or replacement, at TOTO’s® option, of products or parts found to be defective, provided that such products were properly installed and used in accordance with OWNER’S MANUAL. TOTO® reserves the right to make such inspections as may be necessary in order to determine the cause of the defect. TOTO® will not charge for labor or parts in ® connection with warranty repairs or replacements. TOTO® is not responsible for the cost of removal, EcoPower Flush Valve return and/or reinstallation of products. 3. This warranty does not apply to the following items: c a) Damage or loss sustained in a natural calamity such as fire, earthquake, flood, thunder, electrical storm, etc. Models b) Damage or loss resulting from any unreasonable use, misuse, abuse, negligence, or improper maintenance of the product. AUTOMATIC TOILET FLUSH VALVE Important Safeguards.................1 c) Damage or loss resulting from removal, improper repair, or modification of the product. d) Damage or loss resulting from sediments or foreign matter contained in a water system. Model Number e) Damage or loss resulting from improper installation or from installation of a unit in a harsh and/or hazardous environment. and Specifications.................2 f) Damage or loss resulting from acts of animals such as mice and insects.
    [Show full text]
  • Behavioral Economics and the Design of a Dual-Flush Toilet TN 71105 2 JUN 03 2013
    California Energy Commission DOCKETED 12-AAER-2C 1 Behavioral Economics and the Design of a Dual-Flush Toilet TN 71105 2 JUN 03 2013 3 Jade S. Arocha 4 10305 Dover Street #713 5 Westminster, CO 80021, U.S.A. 6 [email protected] 7 970 310-1738 8 and 9 Laura M. J. McCann 10 Dept. of and Applied Agricultural Economics 11 212 Mumford Hall 12 University of Missouri 13 Columbia, MO 65203, U.S.A. 14 [email protected] 15 573 882-1304 16 17 Initial submission May 18, 2012 18 Revised submission, October 15, 2012 19 20 21 22 23 1 24 Abstract 25 Dual-flush toilets, which use a high-volume flush for solid waste and a lower-volume flush for 26 liquid waste, can reduce water consumption. Behavioral economics was used to analyze the 27 design of the dual flush mechanism of the Sloan Uppercut® toilet. The default option, pushing the 28 handle down, results in a large flush. Because Americans have been ―conditioned‖ to push the 29 toilet handle down, it was expected that most users would push the handle down out of habit. A 30 field experiment measuring up versus down flushes in eight women‘s toilets in a municipal 31 building confirmed expectations. While Sloan predicted a 2:1 urination-to-defecation ratio, the 32 observed ratio during the control period was 1:4, i.e. the ratio was the opposite of what would 33 occur if people used the toilets correctly. Adding signage to each stall only increased the ratio to 34 2:5, emphasizing the importance of the default.
    [Show full text]
  • Frequently Asked Questions About Low Flow Toilets
    Water Conservation Devices » Selecting a Toilet? » Be Sure The Toilet Will Work In Your Building » Purchasing an ultra-low-flush toilet » Choosing a Licensed Plumber/Contractor » What should I know about maintaining 1.6 gpf toilets? » Disclaimer of Liability Selecting a Toilet Not all ultra low-flush toilets are the same. The ultra low-flush toilet you would install in your multiplex, commercial or industrial bathroom will probably be different from the toilet you install in your home. You want to buy a new toilet and you want to make sure it works properly. Toilets have two basic operational elements: (1) the intake of water used for flushing and (2) the discharge of wastewater. However, there are different types of toilets based on the way they perform these operations. You need to identify which type(s) of toilets are currently in your building and which is the most appropriate type to replace them with before you make a purchase. Gravity-Fed Tank Toilets: If you see freestanding water when peering down into the tank, your toilet is gravity-fed. Gravity toilets, which have a bowl and a tank, are the most common type of toilet found in residential settings but are in some commercial/business settings. They rely on the weight of the water and head pressure (height of the water in the tank) to promote the flush. They depend on the volume of water in the tank to flush wastes and usually require water pressure of no more than 10 - 15 pounds per square inch (psi) to operate properly.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 U.S. Watersense Market Penetration Report
    1 2019 U.S. WaterSense Market Penetration A GMP Research Industry Report commissioned by Plumbing Manufacturers International (PMI) June 2019 GMP Research Inc. | 2999 River Vista Way | Mount Pleasant, SC 29466 | 843-884-9567 | www.gmpresearch.com 2 Copyright and disclaimer notice Information and images contained within this report published by GMP Research Inc. ("GMP Research") are copyrighted and the property of GMP Research Inc. GMP Research Inc. authorizes clients to copy documents or pages published by GMP Research Inc. in this report for internal use only. Copies may be made for others for their personal information only. Any such copy shall retain all copyrights and other proprietary notices, and any disclaimer contained thereon. None of the content of these pages may be incorporated into, reproduced on, or stored in any other report, website, electronic retrieval system, or in any other publication, whether in hard copy or electronic form. Customers may not, without our permission, 'mirror' this information on their own server, or modify or re-use text or graphics of this report for another report or system. Notwithstanding the above, permission is hereby granted to PMI, PMI’s member, and EPA WaterSense to reproduce or distribute this report in whole or in part for educational or personal use, including without limitation posting this report on PMI’s website, provided that this copyright notice appears in all copies. Certain links contained in this report may lead to resources located on servers maintained by third parties over whom GMP Research Inc. has no control. GMP Research Inc. accepts no responsibility for the information contained on such servers.
    [Show full text]
  • Watersense® Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets Supporting Statement
    WaterSense® Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets Supporting Statement WaterSense® Specification for Flushometer-Valve Water Closets Supporting Statement I. Introduction The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) WaterSense program released its specification for flushometer-valve water closets to further promote and enhance the market for water-efficient commercial restroom plumbing fixtures. The intent of this specification is to help purchasers identify products that meet EPA’s criteria for water efficiency and performance. This specification addresses flushometer-valve water closets, including fixtures that receive liquid and solid waste and use water to convey waste through a trap seal into a gravity drainage system, as well as flushometer valves that deliver water to water closet fixtures via a pressurized water supply line. Flushometer-valve water closets are typically employed in commercial and public-use restrooms. Retrofit devices, including flushometer-valve handles or other aftermarket retrofit systems, are not covered by this specification. II. Current Status of Flushometer-Valve Water Closets There are approximately 27 million flushometer-valve water closets currently in use in the United States, and about 500,000 new flushometer-valve water closets are sold for installation in new buildings or for replacement of aging fixtures each year. The Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPAct 1992) established a maximum flush volume of 1.6 gallons per flush (gpf) (6.0 liters per flush [Lpf]) for all water closets sold in the United States after January 1, 1997. These requirements are codified in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 10 CFR Part 430 (specifically §430.32[1] Water Closets).
    [Show full text]
  • MADERA™ Flowise® 16-1/2" HEIGHT ELONGATED FLUSHOMETER TOILET VITREOUS CHINA LESS EVERCLEAN® BARRIER FREE MADERA™ Flowise® 16-1/2" HEIGHT ELONGATED LESS EVERCLEAN®
    MADERA™ FloWise® 16-1/2" HEIGHT ELONGATED FLUSHOMETER TOILET VITREOUS CHINA LESS EVERCLEAN® BARRIER FREE MADERA™ FloWise® 16-1/2" HEIGHT ELONGATED LESS EVERCLEAN® • Floor mount flushometer valve toilet • Vitreous china • High Efficiency, Low Consumption. Operates in the range of 1.1 gpf to 1.6 gpf (4.2 Lpf to 6.0 Lpf) • Meets definition of HET (High Efficiency Toilet) when used with a high efficiency flush valve (1.28 gpf or 1.6 / 1.1 gpf dual flush) • Fully glazed 2-1/8" trapway • Elongated bowl • 10" or 12" roughing-in • 16-1/2" rim height for accessible application • Condensation channel • Powerful direct-fed siphon jet action • 10" x 12" water surface area • 1-1/2" inlet spud • 2 bolt caps • 100% factory flush tested ❏ 3043.001 Elongated bowl only, top spud ❏ 3248.001 Elongated bowl only, top spud with SEE REVERSE FOR ROUGHING-IN DIMENSIONS slotted rim for bedpan holding (White only) ❏ 3249.001 Elongated bowl only, back spud To Be Specified: ❏ Color: ❏ White ❏ Bone System MaP* Score: ❏ Seat: • 1,000 grams of miso @ 1.1 gpf, 1.28 gpf or 1.6 gpf ❏ American Standard #5901.100 Heavy duty when used with an American Standard flush valve open front less cover * Maximum Performance (MaP) testing performed by IAPMO ❏ American Standard #5905.100 Extra heavy R&T Lab. MaP Report conducted by Veritec Consulting, Inc. and Koeller and Company. duty open front less cover ❏ Flushometer Valve: ❏ 1.6 gpf: Component Parts: ❏ Sensor-Operated: American Standard Selectronic® ❏ 047007-0070A Inlet Spud (furnished with bowl) DC Power #6065.161.002 (Top Spud)
    [Show full text]
  • Persistence of Bowl Water Contamination During Sequential Flushes of Contaminated Toilets
    HHS Public Access Author manuscript Author ManuscriptAuthor Manuscript Author J Environ Manuscript Author Health. Author Manuscript Author manuscript; available in PMC 2018 October 01. Published in final edited form as: J Environ Health. 2017 October ; 80(3): 34–49. Persistence of Bowl Water Contamination during Sequential Flushes of Contaminated Toilets David L. Johnson, PhD1,†, Robert A. Lynch, PhD1, Stephanie M. Villanella, MS1, Jacob F. Jones, MS1, Haiqin Fang, PhD2, Kenneth R. Mead, PhD3, and Deborah V. L. Hirst, PhD3 1Department of Occupational and Environmental Health, University of Oklahoma College of Public Health, P.O. Box 26901, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 72126-0901 2Key Laboratory of Food Safety Risk Assessment, China National Center for Food Safety Risk Assessment, Ministry of Health, Beijing 100021, PR China 3Division of Applied Research and Technology, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Cincinnati, Ohio 45213 Abstract Toilets contaminated with infectious organisms are a recognized contact disease transmission hazard. Previous studies indicate that toilet bowl water can remain contaminated for several flushes after the contamination occurs. This study characterized contamination persistence over an extended series of flushes using both indicator particles and viable bacteria. For this study, toilets were seeded with microbe-size microbial surrogates and with Pseudomonas fluorescens or Clostridium difficile bacteria and flushed up to 24 times. Bowl water samples collected after seeding and after each flush indicated the clearance per flush and residual bowl water contaminant concentration. Toilets exhibited 3 + log10 contaminant reductions with the first flush, only 1–2 logs with the second flush, and less than 1 log thereafter.
    [Show full text]