Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Belgian toilet cisterns
Can anyone give me a bleedingly obvious reason why two identical WCs with maybe a metre difference in head are performing so differently? The higher one seems to suck like a ... , and leaves only just enough water to cover the "S" bend. The other one circulates and leaves a normal amount of water in the pan I don't actually want to get too involved (for obvious reasons0 but can anyone give a few pointers as to why the first seems to have an over active syphon? -- geoff |
#2
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Belgian toilet cisterns
On Mon, 1 Oct 2012 21:31:09 +0100, geoff wrote:
Can anyone give me a bleedingly obvious reason why two identical WCs with maybe a metre difference in head are performing so differently? The higher one seems to suck like a ... , and leaves only just enough water to cover the "S" bend. The other one circulates and leaves a normal amount of water in the pan I don't actually want to get too involved (for obvious reasons0 but can anyone give a few pointers as to why the first seems to have an over active syphon? Gravitational pull on the water creating a partial vaccum. Invert the WC, screwing it to the ceiling can be a quite effective approach. Some standoff washers would probably be required in order to balance the siphon action with the mass of water in the pan. Any infirm or elderly users of the device would probably benefit from a parachute harness [available from Ebay]. For initial commissioning of the project I would tend to avoid curries and go toward a high fibre diet. Until solids are mastered, I would definitley stick to the floor mounted device for urination purposes. HN |
#3
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Belgian toilet cisterns
geoff wrote:
Can anyone give me a bleedingly obvious reason why two identical WCs with maybe a metre difference in head are performing so differently? The higher one seems to suck like a ... , and leaves only just enough water to cover the "S" bend. The other one circulates and leaves a normal amount of water in the pan I don't actually want to get too involved (for obvious reasons0 but can anyone give a few pointers as to why the first seems to have an over active syphon? Is the stack properly vented? I would guess that the falling water from the higher loo is capable of exerting a greater suction because the height of the fall is greater than the lower one. In fact, if water is being pulled below the trap level in the upper pan, the lower one may be causing air to be drawn into the soil pipe via the upper pan. Tim |
#4
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Belgian toilet cisterns
geoff was thinking very hard :
Can anyone give me a bleedingly obvious reason why two identical WCs with maybe a metre difference in head are performing so differently? The higher one seems to suck like a ... , and leaves only just enough water to cover the "S" bend. The other one circulates and leaves a normal amount of water in the pan I don't actually want to get too involved (for obvious reasons0 but can anyone give a few pointers as to why the first seems to have an over active syphon? The flow from the higher one will hit the bowl faster, making the speed of exit faster. The faster exit once started will be slower to come to a stop, so more of the water in the bend over flows before it stops. -- Regards, Harry (M1BYT) (L) http://www.ukradioamateur.co.uk |
#5
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Belgian toilet cisterns
When you say a one metre difference in head do you mean the cistern is mounted higher on one than the other?
If so, it seems to me that the water has greater chance to get up to a higher speed from the higher cistern. |
#6
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Belgian toilet cisterns
In message , Archibald
writes On Mon, 1 Oct 2012 21:31:09 +0100, geoff wrote: Can anyone give me a bleedingly obvious reason why two identical WCs with maybe a metre difference in head are performing so differently? The higher one seems to suck like a ... , and leaves only just enough water to cover the "S" bend. The other one circulates and leaves a normal amount of water in the pan I don't actually want to get too involved (for obvious reasons0 but can anyone give a few pointers as to why the first seems to have an over active syphon? Gravitational pull on the water creating a partial vaccum. No **** sherlock good to see a newbie cutting his milk teeth with a sense of humour -- geoff |
#7
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Belgian toilet cisterns
In message
1242013644370821660.533313timdownie2003-nospampleaseyahoo.co.uk@reader80 ..eternal-september.org, Tim+ writes geoff wrote: Can anyone give me a bleedingly obvious reason why two identical WCs with maybe a metre difference in head are performing so differently? The higher one seems to suck like a ... , and leaves only just enough water to cover the "S" bend. The other one circulates and leaves a normal amount of water in the pan I don't actually want to get too involved (for obvious reasons0 but can anyone give a few pointers as to why the first seems to have an over active syphon? Is the stack properly vented? I would guess that the falling water from the higher loo is capable of exerting a greater suction because the height of the fall is greater than the lower one. In fact, if water is being pulled below the trap level in the upper pan, the lower one may be causing air to be drawn into the soil pipe via the upper pan. This is something that has changed in the past 12 months since I was last here (which I should have mentioned). What you are alluding to is a design problem which would have been there from build. -- geoff |
#8
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Belgian toilet cisterns
In message ,
Murmansk writes When you say a one metre difference in head do you mean the cistern is mounted higher on one than the other? If so, it seems to me that the water has greater chance to get up to a higher speed from the higher cistern. Well, yes - if it had always been like that, but the upper one worked like normal last year -- geoff |
#9
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Belgian toilet cisterns
"geoff" wrote in message ...
Can anyone give me a bleedingly obvious reason why two identical WCs with maybe a metre difference in head are performing so differently? The higher one seems to suck like a ... , and leaves only just enough water to cover the "S" bend. The other one circulates and leaves a normal amount of water in the pan I don't actually want to get too involved (for obvious reasons0 but can anyone give a few pointers as to why the first seems to have an over active syphon? I suggest a descale..... inlet and outlet. |
#10
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Belgian toilet cisterns
geoff wrote:
In message 1242013644370821660.533313timdownie2003-nospampleaseyahoo.co.uk@reader80 .eternal-september.org, Tim+ writes geoff wrote: Can anyone give me a bleedingly obvious reason why two identical WCs with maybe a metre difference in head are performing so differently? The higher one seems to suck like a ... , and leaves only just enough water to cover the "S" bend. The other one circulates and leaves a normal amount of water in the pan I don't actually want to get too involved (for obvious reasons0 but can anyone give a few pointers as to why the first seems to have an over active syphon? Is the stack properly vented? I would guess that the falling water from the higher loo is capable of exerting a greater suction because the height of the fall is greater than the lower one. In fact, if water is being pulled below the trap level in the upper pan, the lower one may be causing air to be drawn into the soil pipe via the upper pan. This is something that has changed in the past 12 months since I was last here (which I should have mentioned). What you are alluding to is a design problem which would have been there from build. Well if its got a Drago (?sp) valve or similar instead of being open vented the valve may have stuck since you last saw it. Tim |
#11
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Belgian toilet cisterns
In message
2006811378370902858.715178timdownie2003-nospampleaseyahoo.co.uk@reader80 ..eternal-september.org, Tim+ writes geoff wrote: In message 1242013644370821660.533313timdownie2003-nospampleaseyahoo.co.uk@reader80 .eternal-september.org, Tim+ writes geoff wrote: Can anyone give me a bleedingly obvious reason why two identical WCs with maybe a metre difference in head are performing so differently? The higher one seems to suck like a ... , and leaves only just enough water to cover the "S" bend. The other one circulates and leaves a normal amount of water in the pan I don't actually want to get too involved (for obvious reasons0 but can anyone give a few pointers as to why the first seems to have an over active syphon? Is the stack properly vented? I would guess that the falling water from the higher loo is capable of exerting a greater suction because the height of the fall is greater than the lower one. In fact, if water is being pulled below the trap level in the upper pan, the lower one may be causing air to be drawn into the soil pipe via the upper pan. This is something that has changed in the past 12 months since I was last here (which I should have mentioned). What you are alluding to is a design problem which would have been there from build. Well if its got a Drago (?sp) valve or similar instead of being open vented the valve may have stuck since you last saw it. I'll google and check fancy having such a thing named after you, eh ? -- geoff |
#12
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Belgian toilet cisterns
geoff wrote:
In message 2006811378370902858.715178timdownie2003-nospampleaseyahoo.co.uk@reader80 .eternal-september.org, Tim+ writes geoff wrote: In message 1242013644370821660.533313timdownie2003-nospampleaseyahoo.co.uk@reader80 .eternal-september.org, Tim+ writes geoff wrote: Can anyone give me a bleedingly obvious reason why two identical WCs with maybe a metre difference in head are performing so differently? The higher one seems to suck like a ... , and leaves only just enough water to cover the "S" bend. The other one circulates and leaves a normal amount of water in the pan I don't actually want to get too involved (for obvious reasons0 but can anyone give a few pointers as to why the first seems to have an over active syphon? Is the stack properly vented? I would guess that the falling water from the higher loo is capable of exerting a greater suction because the height of the fall is greater than the lower one. In fact, if water is being pulled below the trap level in the upper pan, the lower one may be causing air to be drawn into the soil pipe via the upper pan. This is something that has changed in the past 12 months since I was last here (which I should have mentioned). What you are alluding to is a design problem which would have been there from build. Well if its got a Drago (?sp) valve or similar instead of being open vented the valve may have stuck since you last saw it. I'll google and check fancy having such a thing named after you, eh ? Oops. Not Drago but durgo. https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=du...&client=safari Tim |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Where to buy French/Belgian mains sockets? | UK diy | |||
Belgian Block Curbing, Any tips? | Home Repair | |||
Toilet Cisterns etc ? | UK diy | |||
Quality Toilet Cisterns | UK diy | |||
know anything about cisterns? | UK diy |