h a l f b a k e r yThese statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Navy showers: turn water on, wet body,
turn water off, soap up, turn water back
on only to rinse off. A newspaper article
was talking about showering like this, and
how you can save an average of 12 gallons
per shower doing this, but it is such an
irregular and unusual thing... I mean,
to
be in the shower and not hear the water
running, and to hear yourself lathering
up.. it's just weird i'm sorry.
It's not just weird, it's uncomfortable, as
the supply of steam quickly dissapates,
leaving you wet and cold.
With such an extreme change in the
alternative, it is not likely to catch on
unless serious water shortages finally beat
it into people's heads.
A less extreme alternative is sort of a half-
way point between the 2 extremes: It is a
device that hooks up as a shower head
and faucet handle that replaces the 2
things that are missing in the navy
shower:
1. The ambient noise of the shower, that
is useful for hiding hygenic habits and the
question "what are you doing in the
bathroom?"
2. The steam mist that keeps you warm in
the shower, maybe just as effectively as
the shower itself.
The ambient noise shouldn't be hard, as
I've heard my house's plumbing make
some very weird and sometimes loud
noises as the water runs through it. The
steam shouldn't be too hard of a problem,
as all you need is a mist of hotter water
than what you set your regular shower to.
A small vibrating noise-making/whistling/
rattling device could use the water
pressure to create a hopefully not
annoying ambient noise. Hooking up
some simple atomizers, or even spray
bottle sprayers could do the mist/
spraying.
Technologically, it would not be difficult to
achieve, and the net savings would be
ultimately beneficial. You would save a
little less than 12 gallons per shower, but
with more people using it, it would be a
definite water-saver, and a electricity
saver as well, as less water has to be
heated for showering.
Potential problems: the sound of water is
really really really soothing, it will be hard
to find a suitable replacement. Also, the
atomizers/sprayers would either need
regular replacing or filters used, adding
more to costs and detering purchases.
Quench Showers
http://www.quenchshowers.com/
another water saving shower idea. Basically it recirculates the water (only after the initial dirty water has been flushed away). [xaviergisz, Apr 22 2007]
Personal shower trainer
Personal_20Shower_20Trainer
"Showering for me can often be perplexing, and this makes me wonder that perhaps I'm just not doing it right." [imaginality, Apr 24 2007]
Fog Gun
http://www.nous.org.uk/fog.html
Do away with the showerhead altogether [5th Earth, Apr 25 2007]
[link]
|
| |
I like it. An atomizer head on the shower, with a toggle lever. Flip the toggle for the hissing of atomized water. Turn up the heat if it needs to be hotter. This could be a simple retrofit for an existing showerhead. Atomizer nozzles on copper water lines are commonplace in hot climates - the atomized water provides local cooling for zoo visitors etc. |
|
| |
The problem I see is the toggle switch. Your hands are most likely going to be very soapy and that means getting soap all over the switch thus using more water to clean it off. I would suggest using a pressure sensitive floor mat that would change the shower setting when stepped on. |
|
| |
Let's introduce another simple-to-
create device to take care of the soapy
hands problem: |
|
| |
A device that acts as a switch/valve,
turning on and off water, but that also
activates a small, mechanically timed
sprayer that cleans the switch of the
soapy mess. The switch can be a push
button switch which is protected under
a flexible sheet of rubber, or it can be a
conventional, twist action valve. |
|
| |
The sprayer is activated whenever the
switch is pressed or turned, and stays
own for a few seconds, cleaning off the
switch. |
|
| |
Concerning the Quench Showers of
which a link was provided... I am trying
to aim my system at not needing
electricity to operate. I don't think that
electricity and showers should go
together. |
|
| |
I misread the title of this at first. I wondered what on earth [twitch] might be thinking of (not that I knew it was [twitch] at that point, of course). |
|
| |
In my experience, Navy showers actually constitute 10% of the ship showering regularly for about half an hour each, and 90% of the crew for some reason deciding never to shower, even when you throw them in the stall, and zip tie the curtain shut. |
|
| |
I've run into this strange non-showering type elsewhere. I'm sure they would like a shower simulator... but finding a way to get them to actually lather up and rinse off would be much more desirable if you ask me. |
|
| |
Bad jokes about abusing this system will likely be endless. Then again, it's a simple idea with good intentions, and I like those. |
|
| |
Buckminster Fuller upgraded the mist nozzles, removed the main sprayer, and made what he called the "fog-gun" shower. Great for conserving water, actually cleaned, by most accounts rather unpleasant to use. |
|
| |
To create the ambient noise, you can still use water, but just the same small amount of water hitting a sounding board and then getting collected. |
|
| |
I'd question whether 'the sound of water is really, really soothing' - not if you're taking your Navy Shower in a submarine... (I'm only assuming they have showers on submarines. Raises the question of where the water goes when it drains out of the shower? ) |
|
| |
It is not only soothing to hear, to feel the
hot water hitting you, is like getting a
massage. That's hard to compete with. |
|
| |
Could the water sound be supplied by a tape recording? Of course that would require the prerequisite invention of a combination shower head/CD player. |
|
| |
No recording. My criteria for this idea was
no electrical devices. |
|
| |