WATER SYSTEMS


rating for low water consumption. “In fact,” Andrew Hay said, “the Bloomberg installation is almost certainly the UK’s biggest vacuum sanitation project yet. Within the static buildings arena,” he continued, “we believe there is huge potential for the Jets technology in healthcare facilities, and we plan to strongly target both NHS and private healthcare providers over coming months.”


NHS infection control focus Andrew Hay and Nicky Brown explained that the Jets vacuum sanitation technology harnesses principles first exploited in the late 19th century in vacuum sewerage systems by Dutch engineer, Charles Liernur. Today’s distinctly 21st-century Jets system is based around a pump device called a Vacuumarator, which in toilet applications creates the vacuum needed to flush the appliance using very little water, macerates the sewage, and transports it along the pipes to a point where gravity takes over and discharges it into the drain. In the case of waste from, say, a chemotherapy unit, the slurry can be transported to a purpose-designed storage tank until the radioactivity level is sufficiently low for discharge to drain.


Significantly reduced water consumption


Jets says all this is accomplished using ‘up to 90 per cent’ less water than a ‘traditional’ gravity toilet. With such low water use, the volume of sewage – which the Vacuumarator expels as a fine slurry – is also cut ‘by up to 90 per cent’. This not only lessens the load on pipes and treatment facilities, but – a key selling point for healthcare facilities – also makes blockages, and the ensuing disruption while a ward is decanted to rectify the problems, ‘much less likely’. Indeed, the first UK healthcare facility to be supplied with a Jets vacuum sanitation system by Otter Vacuum Systems, Truro’s Royal Cornwall Hospital, had a vacuum toilet system installed last autumn to serve its Lowen Ward – part of the Trelawney Wing, which cares for teenagers and young adults with cancer – after repeated problems involving blockage and sewage back-up with the ward’s gravity drainage system. Andrew Hay explained: “Many of the patients on the Lowen Ward are immunosuppressed, making a clean, hygienic care environment paramount. The problems with the existing gravity drainage system had directly affected the ward’s operation and the efficiency of the services provided. The system required constant monitoring and jetting, placing a considerable additional burden on the Maintenance team.”


To address the issue, it was proposed to install a Jets vacuum drainage system to operate independently of the gravity system. With a complete shutdown of the


46 Health Estate Journal August 2018


The Otter Vacuum Systems headquarters in Downton, near Salisbury.


ward to undertake the work not viable, the project was run in phases, with ‘sub-areas’ shut down for the construction works.


Construction team’s co-operation Andrew Hay said: “The project team included GPJ Consulting Engineers, working as project designer/project administrator on behalf of the Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust, and the main contractor, TClarke, working closely with us at Otter Vacuum Systems. The team worked really well together from the outset, and the project was completed on time, on budget, with minimal disruption.” Key elements included the temporary relocation of some ward services; installation of a vacuum station to accommodate the vacuum plant, control panel, and pressurisation set/break tank; installation of vacuum drainage pipework (for black and grey water); redirection of drainage from existing inlets below ground; installation of vacuum toilets and grey water receiver tanks; drainage connection to the foul sewer; commissioning, and Maintenance staff familiarisation and training.


Training at Otter Vacuum HQ Jim Tinsdeall, the Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust’s head of Estate Operations, said: “Prior to construction starting, TClarke was trained at Otter Vacuum’s headquarters, which paid dividends during the work in terms of us meeting tight project deadlines. Otter Vacuum Systems and GPJ Consulting Engineers visited the site throughout the design, construction, and commissioning phases to ensure a successful project outcome. Following the installation, Otter Vacuum Systems introduced our Estates Maintenance team to the system via a familiarisation session held on the ward, which combined a


presentation and practical training. “Following installation, a planned maintenance regime was introduced, and reactive maintenance has since been massively reduced. There has been just a single critical fault since the installation – involving a blocked pump, which, thanks to the post-installation training, was rectified with little disruption.”


A considered decision


He added: “The decision to fit vacuum drainage in a hospital was not taken lightly. We went and looked at installations in numerous locations, including train stations, hotels, and other public venues. The key priority for us was to eliminate the problem of toilets backing up due to blockages caused by a poor installation of traditional drains, and the ongoing problem we all suffer from in hospitals of inappropriate materials, such as ‘super wipes’, being introduced into the drainage system. After tendering the project we visited Otter Vacuum Systems’ headquarters armed with several packs of the wipes, to test the system’s ability to deal with them, along with paper towels. The system passed with flying colours, coping with fistful after fistful.


Delighted with the project’s success “Since its installation we have only had one problem of a pump being blocked – caused by a full-size bin liner being flushed through the system. The blocked pump was cleared without having to open the drainage systems in patient areas. The area we fitted the vacuum drainage system to houses immunocompromised patients. We are delighted with the success of the project, and will be looking to fit the vacuum sanitation technology into high-risk areas as and when built or refurbished. Installation-wise, the drainage


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72