As a continuation to my last blog on
recent trends in mechanical contracting, waterless urinals have taken over as
the urinal of choice for building owners seeking LEED credit. Any Life Cycle
Assessment will prove the savings one could expect from switching from
conventional urinals, but many refuse to accept the proof because of the long
term maintenance issues associated with waterless urinals. First there must be
and understanding of what waterless urinals are, and how they operate.
How it Works.
Unlike conventional urinals,
waterless urinals do not come equipped with a connection for a flush valve.
Waterless urinals in the U.S typically come in three styles. The first type of
waterless urinal is the microbiological type. This model includes a block found
in the waste outlet that contains spores which help break down the urine with
bacteria which in turn helps eliminate odor. The next type of urinal is the
check valve type. These models include a sealed valve that is similar to a
one-way valve that is typically activated using gravity or can sometimes be
spring operated. The last type of urinals are the barrier style. This
particular model is unique as it utilizes a diaphragm that contains oil. The
oil helps prevent odors as the urine is more dense than the oil.
Maintenance Issues
One of the main issues with all
waterless urinals is the maintenance aspect. The barrier style model is a prime
example. If the oil in the diaphragm is not replaced often, users start to
detect odors because there is no longer a shield against them. Many owners will
forego waterless urinals just based on costs associated with maintaining them.
Recently, I have noticed many owners have requested that a domestic water line
be stubbed down in the wall directly behind the urinal, so it will be easier to
replace the waterless urinal back to a flush valve model in a future retrofit. Owners
uneasiness may come from the many horror stories about waterless urinals. As
can be inferred by the name, waterless urinals use no water. That being said,
that means there is nothing to flush out the urine to cleanse the copper soil
piping. As urine sits in the copper piping, the ammonia from the urine attacks
the piping causing corrosion to set in. In some cases, pipe actually cracks
causing urine to be released behind the plumbing wall, which can lead to even
more problems. This leaves owners wondering, is savings from utilizing
waterless urinals worth the possible long term maintenance problems.
Conclusion
Waterless urinals have been quite
trend in recent years, but some might say the trend is coming to an end. Until
manufacturers focus more on maintenance and reliability they will continue to
see a loss in customers. Is this the end of waterless urinals? And if so, what
is going to take its place.
I totally agreed. I guess we can replace regular urinals with "little flush" instead of "no flush". Just a little bit reforming work on regular urinals, we can save tonnes of water. It cost less and avoid the problem of the problems above. It can be the solution, at least for now.
ReplyDeleteVery good observation. Some examples can be found about this problem, such as Chicago's City Hall and the Spanish River High School in Boca Raton. In the case of the Spanish River High School, copper pipes behind the walls in at least two bathrooms corroded, leading to urine flowing across floors and terrible odor. The odor went through the hallways and into a classroom. Parents were concerned if this problem could lead to a health issue to their children. There are other three schools in the Palm beach County with similar bathroom solution. The cost to fix that is estimated at $500,000.
ReplyDeleteI've always condone the use of waterless urinals. "It's green, sustainable, and convenient." According to the this maintenance issue, however, the urinals do need a better solution. If there is the slightest possibility that the urine in the pipes will burst and urine odor spreading throughout (regardless of the restroom infected by the unpleasant smell already), it should be avoid entirely. I mean, if the problem exists, maintenance should be reevaluated for the benefit of long term use.
ReplyDelete