Toilet spray gun

[AGAS]

I've done that,

 

[muggles]

So if I place the hose so that it's spray can reach into the toilet but the 'head' itself cannot actually go into the toilet, then it's ok?

Correct(ish) - if the hose is short enough to prevent the head touching the pan, no backflow prevention is required. You'll have a hard time washing down the side of the pan nearest the hose in that situation though...

 

[75pete]

I've seen them fitted in the Sanderson in London a few years back and was a little surprised. Expect now that lots of hotels have them fitted, "what ever floats your boat " I'm a brush or stick man.

 

[AGAS]

What's wrong with a bit of bleach

 

[muggles]

If you were sticking to the WRAS regulations to the letter, then any plumber who has ever installed an outside tap on a property must also have told their customer that they must NEVER EVER connect a hose pipe to it that was long enough to reach their downstairs loo. Which probably means Homebase should be taken to court too because a 50m garden hose will reach pretty much anywhere.

Yes, because everyone drags a hose into their house to wash the loo :-/

If you can't see the difference between a permanent fixture next to the toilet, specifically designed for washing down and always available, and a hosepipe attached to a garden tap, there really is no hope for you

 

[Hugh Jaleak]

A lot of the reason for these regs are in case of a negative pressure situation in the water supply. Yes, it doesn't happy often, but in the event of a burst, or the Fire Service drawing off large quantities from hydrants for emergency use, there is a possibility that water could be drawn back into the supply, e.g. from a hosepipe filling a garden pond where the end is submerged.

As a total belt and braces approach to protect the integrity of the mains supply, these rules exist, however OTT you may feel they are, it is for Public Health purposes, and to ensure the drinking water at yours and everyone else taps, is fit to drink.

 

[rules&rulers]

some use the douche tap system instead of the paper method,cant say no more as i will be reported.

Kind of put me off some halal outlets.

EDIT as said a naughty un Pc WORD,FFS/

 

[JBR]

Correct(ish) - if the hose is short enough to prevent the head touching the pan, no backflow prevention is required. You'll have a hard time washing down the side of the pan nearest the hose in that situation though...

Oh I think we manage. This diagram demonstrates how our spray can be directed to any poo deposits in the toilet bowl, yet the spray head cannot enter the toilet bowl. That, of course, is assuming that we actually have such a spray!

 

[AGAS]

Oh I think we manage. This diagram demonstrates how our spray can be directed to any poo deposits in the toilet bowl, yet the spray head cannot enter the toilet bowl. That, of course, is assuming that we actually have such a spray!

why not show as i asked earlier , some photos of your shyte blaster . whats the hesitation after taking the time to show the picture you've shown , much quicker with your phone

 

[Madrab]

The whole idea is to save water with lower volume flushes but following that up with another 2 litres to wash the pan down from a douche kinda defeats the purpose. That aside that's not what they were designed to do, they are all imported and introduced mainly because a certain sector of the population want it to clean themselves and not to rinse the bowl.

Regardless of the backflow protection, they are not WRAS approved, so they're not allowed to be installed directly on the main, them's the rules, it's not complicated.

 

[JBR]

why not show as i asked earlier , some photos of your shyte blaster . whats the hesitation after taking the time to show the picture you've shown , much quicker with your phone

I told you. I haven't got one!

 

[JBR]

The whole idea is to save water with lower volume flushes but following that up with another 2 litres to wash the pan down from a douche kinda defeats the purpose. That aside that's not what they were designed to do, they are all imported and introduced mainly because a certain sector of the population want it to clean themselves and not to rinse the bowl.

If some idiot EU bureaucrats hadn't brought in some stupid rule about low volume flushes, it probably wouldn't be necessary.

When I flush once, it usually doesn't remove all the nasty stuff, so I need to flush a second time and very often a third! If we had a traditional toilet with a stronger flush, that probably wouldn't be necessary. I'm sure I'm not alone either.

So this water saving idea seems to have backfired, doesn't it?

 

[Dan Robinson]

Perhaps you should address your diet.

 

[Madrab]

So this water saving idea seems to have backfired, doesn't it?

A decent toilet with a good pan design usually won't have any issue with a 6ltr flush. A £50ish toilet that has a narrow neck and crap water ways will struggle.

 

[just pumps]

When I flush once, it usually doesn't remove all the nasty stuff, so I need to flush a second time and very often a third! If we had a traditional toilet with a stronger flush, that probably wouldn't be necessary.

And there lies your problem. Change the dump valve then!