Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report

Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
February 1, 2011
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Summary
Pre-rinse spray valves (PRSVs) are used in commercial food operations for the purpose of
removing food waste from dishes prior to dishwashing. PRSVs can consume nearly one-third of
the water used in the dish room. Of the PRSVs currently in use in commercial kitchens across
the United States, many have flow rates exceeding the current 1.6 gallon per minute (gpm)
maximum flow rate allowed by the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct). Over the past several
years, manufacturers have developed high-efficiency PRSVs with flow rates lower than the
standard.
To capitalize on the opportunity for potential water and energy savings, on July 10, 2009, the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced its intent to develop a specification for
water-efficient, energy-efficient, and high-performing PRSVs for the WaterSense® and ENERGY
STAR® programs.
The WaterSense program labels products that not only save water, but also perform as well as
or better than standard models. Though EPAct 2005 specifies the maximum flow rate for
PRSVs, it does not address the performance of these products. To provide a mechanism to
compare PRSV efficiency and performance, the ASTM F2324-03 Standard Test Method for PreRinse Spray Valves (hereafter referred to as ASTM F2324) was developed. In accordance with
the test method, product efficiency is determined by measuring flow rate in gpm. Product
performance is determined by measuring ―
cleanability,‖ or the time it takes for the PRSV to rinse
tomato paste from a plate, in units of seconds per plate.
Though ASTM F2324 provides a measure for PRSV performance, during EPA’s initial
evaluation of this product category, it received input from some of its utility partners and other
stakeholders with concerns about the following:
PRSVs with flow rates less than 1.0 gpm are used longer in the field than higher flowing
PRSVs. As a result, high-efficiency PRSVs might save less water than expected.
Users are generally not satisfied with high-efficiency PRSV performance, although these
same PRSVs score well on the ASTM F2324 cleanability test.
Because it is interested in labeling water- and energy-efficient PRSVs that perform as well or
better than standard PRSVs, EPA decided that it needed additional field data on PRSVs before
developing a specification that addresses water use, energy use, and performance. From
January through June 2010, EPA monitored PRSV use at 10 commercial and institutional
kitchens. The objectives of the study were to determine if:
High-efficiency PRSVs save less water than expected because users have to spend
more time rinsing dishes;
Users are less satisfied with high-efficiency PRSVs; and
The ASTM F2324 cleanability test method provides an indication of PRSV performance
in the field.
EPA’s contractor, Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG), collected water use, use time, operating
flow rate, and user satisfaction data at 10 commercial kitchen facilities in the Washington, D.C.
i
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
and Boston, Massachusetts, areas. The 10 participating facilities included four university dining
halls, one high school cafeteria, and five restaurants.
ERG monitored the existing PRSV at each facility for three weeks. Then, ERG installed and
monitored three new PRSVs for three weeks each at each facility. The PRSVs included in the
study had flow rates ranging from 0.5 to 1.6 gpm and varying cleanability times ranging from 17
to 26 seconds per plate when evaluated in accordance with the ASTM F2324 test method. At
the end of each three-week monitoring period, ERG surveyed the PRSV users to assess their
satisfaction with each PRSV.
Using the data collected, EPA evaluated the following in order to provide analyses to support
the research objectives:
The relationship between water use and PRSV operating flow rates;
The relationship between use time and PRSV operating flow rates;
The relationship between use time and cleanability time;
User satisfaction as compared to PRSV operating flow rates, use time, and cleanability
time; and
Additional quantitative and qualitative user feedback.
From these analyses, EPA concluded that use time remained relatively constant among the
PRSVs tested and that high-efficiency PRSVs did use less water and energy. EPA also found
that users were less satisfied with PRSVs that flowed at less than 1.0 gpm. However, EPA
concluded that use time did not have a perceivable impact on user satisfaction in this study,
which may be because use time remained relatively constant among the PRSVs tested and
users could not perceive a difference in the amount of time they used each PRSV. EPA also
found that the ASTM F2324 cleanability test did not indicate which of the PRSVs tested the
users preferred, nor was it an indicator of actual use time in the field. Since several users
indicated pressure (i.e., spray force) as a reason for dissatisfaction, pressure may be a factor
that EPA should consider for differentiating PRSV performance.
Because PRSVs have demonstrated significant water and energy savings potential, EPA will
continue working with stakeholder groups to identify and develop requirements that highefficiency PRSVs must meet in order to provide the expected performance. In addition, EPA will
evaluate other issues that became apparent throughout the study, such as addressing PRSV
life cycle testing and determining why some PRSVs may have operating flow rates far different
than their flow rates tested using the ASTM F2324 test method. EPA’s ultimate goal is to create
a specification that ensures long-term water and energy savings and acceptable performance.
ii
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
CONTENTS
Page
1
Background ....................................................................................................................... 1
2
Terminology ...................................................................................................................... 3
3
Objectives ......................................................................................................................... 4
4
Methodology ...................................................................................................................... 4
4.1
Facility Selection ................................................................................................... 4
4.2
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves ........................................................................................ 7
4.3
Data Collection Methodology ................................................................................ 8
4.3.1
Flow Rate................................................................................................ 9
4.3.2
Water Use and Use Time ....................................................................... 9
4.3.3
Water Temperature............................................................................... 11
4.3.4
Water Pressure ..................................................................................... 11
4.3.5
Surveys ................................................................................................. 12
5
Limitations ....................................................................................................................... 13
6
Results ............................................................................................................................ 15
6.1
Water Use ........................................................................................................... 18
6.2
Use Time ............................................................................................................. 18
6.3
Cleanability Time ................................................................................................. 19
6.4
User Satisfaction ................................................................................................. 20
6.4.1
User Satisfaction and Flow Rate .......................................................... 20
6.4.2
User Satisfaction and Use Time ........................................................... 21
6.4.3
User Satisfaction and Cleanability Time ............................................... 23
6.4.4
User Satisfaction and Other Performance Characteristics ................... 24
7
Water and Energy Savings Potential .............................................................................. 30
8
Conclusions and Next Steps ........................................................................................... 34
Appendix A:
EPA Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Research Study Scope
Appendix B:
Weekly Site Visit Measurements Form
Appendix C:
User Satisfaction Survey Form
Appendix D:
Data, User Satisfaction Survey Responses, and Facility Operations Survey
Responses
iii
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
LIST OF TABLES
Page
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Regulations and Voluntary Requirements for Pre-Rinse Spray Valves ............................ 2
Facilities Selected for EPA’s Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Study ............................................ 6
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Evaluated ................................................................................... 7
Example Data Logger Output and Use Time and Water Use Calculations Using 1.0 gpm
Maximum Flow Rate.................................................................................................. 11
Example Overall User Satisfaction Score Evaluation ..................................................... 12
EPAct 2005-Compliant Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Study Summary Data Set ................... 16
Average Use Time per PRSV, Facility Average Use Time, and User Satisfaction per
PRSV......................................................................................................................... 21
User Satisfaction Feedback for Unsatisfactory PRSVs ................................................... 26
Energy Use Assumptions and Calculations .................................................................... 30
Estimated Savings From Replacing Category 1 Pre-Rinse Spray Valves ...................... 31
Estimated Savings from Replacing Non-EPAct-complaint Pre-Rinse Spray Valves, ...... 33
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Water Meter and Data Logger Set-Up .............................................................................. 9
Water Use vs. Operating Flow Rate ................................................................................ 18
Use Time vs. Operating Flow Rate ................................................................................. 19
Use Time vs. Cleanability Time ....................................................................................... 20
Frequency of User Satisfaction Scores Among EPAct 2005-Compliant PRSV Categories
(Categorized Using Operating Flow Rate) ................................................................ 21
Frequency of Satisfaction Score Occurrence for PRSVs With More or Less Than the
Average Use Time at a Facility ................................................................................. 23
User Satisfaction vs. Cleanability Time ........................................................................... 24
iv
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
1
Background
Commercial pre-rinse spray valves (PRSVs) are nozzles that spray hot water under pressure to
remove food and grease from dishes, pots, pans, and utensils before they are put into a
dishwasher. In typical commercial food operations, dishwashing consumes nearly two-thirds of
all the water used. Of that water, nearly half is consumed by PRSVs for the purpose of removing
food waste from dishes prior to dishwashing.1
An estimated 1.35 million2 commercial PRSVs are in use in the United States. Many of these
PRSVs may be inefficient units, with flow rates exceeding the current 1.6 gallons per minute
(gpm) maximum flow rate allowed by the federal standard governing such devices, the Energy
Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005). These non-EPAct 2005-compliant PRSVs flow between 3.0
and 5.0 gpm. Since Congress enacted the federal standard, however, manufacturers have
developed high-efficiency PRSVs with flows as low as 0.5 gpm.
To capitalize on this opportunity for potential water and energy savings, on July 10, 2009, the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced its intent to develop a specification for
water-efficient, energy-efficient, and high-performing PRSVs for the WaterSense® and ENERGY
STAR® programs.
The WaterSense program labels products that use less water and perform as well as or better
than standard models. Although EPAct 2005 specifies the maximum flow rate for PRSVs, it
does not address the performance of PRSVs. To provide a mechanism to compare PRSV
efficiency and performance, Pacific Gas and Electric’s Food Service Technology Center (FSTC)
developed a timed test to measure the ability of a PRSV to clean a plate. The FSTC test method
was later used by the California Urban Water Conservation Council (CUWCC) to select PRSVs
for their PRSV replacement program and was eventually adopted by the American Society for
Testing and Materials (ASTM International) as ASTM F2324-03 Standard Test Method for PreRinse Spray Valves (hereafter referred to as ASTM F2324).
In accordance with the ASTM F2324 test method, a PRSV’s efficiency is determined by
measuring its flow rate in gpm. A PRSV’s performance is determined by measuring its
―
cleanability,‖ or the average amount of time the PRSV takes to clean tomato paste from a set of
plates, in units of seconds per plate.
The ASTM F2324 test method was originally developed to help water and energy utilities select
high-efficiency PRSVs for their efficiency incentive programs by differentiating products that
used flow restrictors to achieve a lower flow rate, without regard to performance. However,
1
California Urban Water Conservation Council. February 2005. Rinse & Save Program Final Report
Summary.
2
The National Restaurant Association (NRA) estimates that 945,000 commercial food establishments are
present in the United States as of January 2008. A Puget Sound Energy (PSE) direct-install program
estimated that approximately 70 percent of facilities using PRSVs are restaurants (Tso, Bing, P.E. and
John Koeller, P.E. Pre-Rinse Spray Valve Programs: How are They Really Doing? December 1, 2005. p.
1-12.). Assuming one PRSV per restaurant, if restaurants are 70 percent of the market, then the total
number of PRSVs nationwide can be estimated to be 1.35 million.
1
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
several organizations now use the test method to further differentiate PRSV performance
among those products that do not use flow restrictors by specifying a maximum flow rate and
cleanability threshold that products must meet, as shown in Table 1.
Table 1. Regulations and Voluntary Requirements for Pre-Rinse Spray Valves
Group
Regulation
Domain
California Energy
Commission
(CEC)
Appliance Efficiency
Regulations
Required for all
PRSVs sold in
the state of
California
Federal Energy
Management
Program (FEMP)
Purchasing
specifications for
federal agencies
American Society
of Heating,
Refrigerating, and
Air Conditioning
Engineers, Inc.
(ASHRAE)
Standard 189.12009, Standard for
the Design of HighPerformance Green
Buildings Except
Low-Rise Residential
Buildings
Maximum
Flow Rate
Effective
Date
30 seconds
per plate
January 1,
2006
Required for all 1.25 gpm
PRSVs
purchased by
federal agencies
26 seconds
per plate
December
2008
Voluntary
standard—only
required for
those buildings
meeting the
standard
1.3 gpm
26 seconds
per plate
December
2009
Voluntary
1.6 gpm
program—only
required for
those PRSVs
selected for the
direct installation
program
21 seconds
per plate
20022007
Arizona
Department of
Water Resources
Arizona Rinse Smart Voluntary
1.6 gpm
(direct installation
program—only
program)
required for
those PRSVs
selected for the
direct installation
program
21 seconds
per plate
Began
2005
New York State
Energy Research
and Development
Authority
Focus on Hospitality
(rebate program)
26 seconds
per plate
Began
2004
California Urban
Rinse & Save
Water
Program (direct
Conservation
installation program)
Council (CUWCC)
Voluntary
program—only
required for
those PRSVs
selected for the
rebate program
1.6 gpm
Maximum
Cleanability
Threshold
1.6 gpm
Although these groups have established flow rate and cleanability maximums for PRSVs, EPA
received input from some of its utility partners and other stakeholders that the following might be
occurring:
2
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
PRSVs with flow rates less than 1.0 gpm are used longer in the field than higher flowing
PRSVs. As a result, high-efficiency PRSVs might save less water than expected.
Users are generally not satisfied with high-efficiency PRSV performance, although these
same PRSVs score well on the ASTM F2324 cleanability performance test.
These concerns raised questions of whether EPA should use ASTM F2324 to assess PRSV
performance and as a result, EPA determined that it needed additional field data on PRSVs
before developing a specification that addresses water use, energy use, and performance.
In September 2009, EPA hosted a stakeholder meeting to discuss these outstanding concerns
and presented for comment a draft of its research study scope outlining the study objectives and
EPA’s general approach for collecting PRSV field data. In October 2009, EPA joined the
American Society of Mechanical Engineers/Canadian Standards Association (ASME/CSA) Joint
Harmonization Task Force on Water-Efficient PRSVs (task force), agreeing to collaborate with
ASME/CSA and ASTM on the development of a PRSV performance specification. During the
initial task force meetings, EPA discussed comments and revisions to its research study scope
and agreed to conduct research at 10 commercial and/or institutional facilities. Realizing the
limitations of a small data set, EPA attempted to recruit other parties interested in conducting
similar research. To date, no other organizations have agreed to provide such data. EPA
published its final research study scope on October 26, 2009, which guided its field research.
This report presents EPA’s PRSV field research objectives, methodology, results, potential
water and energy savings, conclusions, and next steps. Supporting information—including
EPA’s Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Research Study Scope, weekly site visit measurements form,
user satisfaction survey, raw data, user satisfaction survey responses, and facility operations
survey responses—are provided in appendices to this document.
2
Terminology
Key terminology used in this report is defined below.
Non-EPAct 2005-compliant PRSVs: Commercial PRSVs that flow higher than the
maximum EPAct 2005 standard of 1.6 gpm.
EPAct 2005-compliant PRSVs: Commercial PRSVs that meet the maximum EPAct 2005
standard of 1.6 gpm. This term encompasses standard and high-efficiency PRSVs,
defined below.
Standard PRSVs: Commercial PRSVs that have tested flow rates between 1.25 and 1.6
gpm.
High-efficiency PRSVs: Commercial PRSVs that are at least 20 percent more efficient
than the current federal standard; specifically in this report, the term refers to PRSVs
that have tested flow rates of 1.25 gpm or less.
Tested flow rate: The flow rate (in gpm) provided on the Food Service Technology
Center’s (FSTC’s) website for each PRSV it tests using the ASTM F2324 test method.
The flow rate is collected per the test method at a flowing water pressure of 60 pounds
3
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
per square inch (psi). The tested flow rate for each PRSV is not provided in this report in
order to mask the model names of PRSVs evaluated.
Operating flow rate: The flow rate (in gpm) measured in the field during this study,
calculated as the average of the weekly operating flow rate measurements for a PRSV
at each test facility. The operating flow rate is measured at the flowing pressure in each
facility and is described further in Section 4.3.1.
Recorded flow rate: The average flow rate (in gpm) recorded by the data logger over a
10-second interval. The flow rate is recorded by the data logger at the flowing pressure
in each facility.
Cleanability time: Cleanability time (in seconds per plate) reported on FSTC’s website for
each PRSV it tested using the ASTM F2324 test method. The cleanability times provided
in this report were rounded to the nearest whole number, in order to mask the model
names of PRSVs evaluated.
3
Objectives
To examine the water use, energy use, use time, and user satisfaction of high-efficiency
PRSVs, EPA initiated a 12-week field study at 10 commercial kitchen facilities in the
Washington, DC, and Boston, Massachusetts, areas. The intent of this research was to answer
the questions outlined in EPA’s Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Research Study Scope, dated October
26, 2009 (see Appendix A). The objectives of the study were to determine if:
High-efficiency PRSVs save water;
Users require more time to rinse dishes when using high-efficiency PRSVs;
The ASTM F2324 cleanability test method accurately predicts whether a user will spend
more time using a given PRSV in the field;
Users are less satisfied with high-efficiency PRSVs;
Users are less satisfied with PRSVs that they have to use for more time in order to rinse
the dishes; and
Users are more satisfied with PRSVs that have lower ASTM F2324 cleanability times.
4
Methodology
This section describes facility selection, PRSVs monitored, and EPA’s data collection
methodology. Field research was conducted by Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG), an EPA
contractor. ERG also worked under contract with EPA to analyze the data.
4.1
Facility Selection
ERG evaluated 22 facilities before choosing 10 at which to conduct field research. Facility
eligibility was based on the requirements outlined in the Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Research
Study Scope. ERG targeted facilities that:
4
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Had an existing PRSV with a tested flow rate less than or equal to 1.6 gpm;
Used PRSVs prior to commercial dishwashing equipment; and
Served on china dishware, not plasticware.
In addition, ERG evaluated other facility characteristics, including:
Water temperature;3
Typical facility customer throughput;
Feasibility of water meter installation;
Willingness to participate; and
Estimated frequency of PRSV use.4
Following ERG’s evaluation of the 22 potential facilities, EPA attempted to select facilities with
existing PRSVs that met EPAct 2005 requirements, but 15 of the 22 facilities evaluated did not
have EPAct 2005-compliant PRSVs in place. Adherence to this requirement was determined not
to be feasible, and five of the final 10 facilities selected for the study did not have existing EPAct
2005-compliant PRSVs.
EPA targeted university dining halls with commercial kitchens for participation in the field study.
University dining halls have a relatively consistent customer throughput that allows usage
patterns to be easily distinguished. A private high school was chosen for the study for similar
reasons. Because restaurants are an important user group and represent a majority of PRSV
installations in the United States, EPA also selected five restaurants to participate in the study.
ERG developed study timelines based on facility operating schedules, taking into account
facility closing periods such as university and school breaks. PRSVs were monitored at all
facilities for three weeks (21 days), with the exception of the PRSVs monitored at Buckingham
Browne & Nichols School (BB&N) (which were monitored for 12 days, because not enough
operating days remained in the school year to collect a full 21-day data set for each PRSV
monitored). The data collection period was set at three weeks to normalize for any anomalies or
abnormalities that could occur at a facility. The field data collection period for each participating
facility occurred between January and June 2010.
Table 2 lists the 10 selected facilities and includes general baseline information for each.
3
Facilities with operating water temperatures well above the water meter operating temperature of 120°F
were not selected.
4
Facilities that did not use a PRSV as the main means of removing food waste from dishes prior to
washing or used PRSVs primarily for purposes other than rinsing food waste from dishes were not
selected.
5
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table 2. Facilities Selected for EPA’s Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Study
Facility Name
Existing
EPAct
2005compliant
PRSV?
Operating
Flow Rate of
Existing
PRSV (gpm)
Operating
Water
Temperature
(°F)
Operating
Static /
Flowing Water
Pressure (psi)
Approximate
Weekly
Customer
Throughput
University Dining Halls
Boston College
McElroy Commons
(BC McElroy),
Chestnut Hill, MA a
No
3.66
118
69 / 39
35,000
Boston College
Stuart Hall (BC
Stuart), Newton, MA
No
4.05
93
75 / 39
15,000
Harvard University
Mather House
(Harvard Mather),
Cambridge, MA a
Yes
0.97
104
50 / 41
4,500
Harvard University
Currier House
(Harvard Currier),
Cambridge, MA
Yes
1.08
99
52 / 48
4,800
129
72 / 25
2,900
Day School
BB&N, Cambridge,
MA
No
3.21
Restaurants
Founding Farmers,
Washington, DC
Yes
1.10
119
58 / 42
5,400
Farmers & Fishers,
Washington, DC
Yes
1.17
126
62 / 55
3,000
Mario’s Italian
Restaurant,
Lexington (Mario’s),
MA
No
4.31
85
91 / 48
1,500
Jimmy’s Steer
House (Jimmy’s),
Arlington, MA
No
2.62
75
67 / 39
5,400
The Fireplace
Yes
1.04
113
73 / 59
1,200
Restaurant (The
Fireplace),
Brookline, MA
a – Harvard Mather and BC McElroy had two PRSVs each, all of which are used for rinsing dishes before
they are put into a commercial dishwasher. At these two facilities, both existing PRSVs were replaced
with the same model of new PRSV during each monitoring period to ensure that one PRSV was not
favored over the other. However, only one PRSV at each facility was equipped with a data logger to
capture detailed usage patterns.
6
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
4.2
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves
Because one of the objectives of the study was to determine whether the ASTM F2324 test
method indicates PRSV performance and use time in the field, EPA only included PRSVs in the
study that had been previously tested by the FSTC in accordance with the ASTM F2324 test
method. Where feasible, participating facilities were given one PRSV to test from each of the
following three flow rate categories (based upon their tested flow rate as reported by FSTC):
Category 1: PRSVs with a tested flow rate of 1.25 to 1.6 gpm
Category 2: PRSVs with a tested flow rate of 1.0 to 1.25 gpm
Category 3: PRSVs with a tested flow rate less than 1.0 gpm
The PRSVs for each facility were selected at random and installed in a random order. Users
were not told the tested flow rate of the PRSVs being installed. No training was provided to
users when new PRSVs were installed.
Table 3 provides a list of PRSVs monitored in the study (masked to conceal model names),
including the operating flow rate for each model in the field, the cleanability time each achieved
on the ASTM F2324 test, and a list of the facilities where each model was evaluated. To
develop the most robust user satisfaction data set possible, ERG monitored each PRSV in at
least two facilities, with the exception of a few PRSVs, as noted in the table.
Table 3. Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Evaluated
PRSV Operating Flow Rate (gpm) a
Rounded Cleanability Time
(seconds per plate)
Facilities Where Evaluated
Category 3 PRSVs (< 1.0 gpm)
N
0.51
21
Harvard Mather
A
0.61
21
Harvard Mather
Jimmy’s
J
0.73
21
Harvard Currier
BC McElroy
Farmers & Fishers
Mario’s
0.86
20
The Fireplace
1.58
25
Founding Farmers
BB&N
1.10
20
BC Stuart
H
E
b
M
7
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table 3. Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Evaluated
PRSV Operating Flow Rate (gpm) a
Rounded Cleanability Time
(seconds per plate)
Facilities Where Evaluated
Category 2 PRSVs (≥ 1.0 to < 1.25 gpm)
L
1.04
23
Harvard Currier
Founding Farmers
I
1.21
22
BC Stuart
Jimmy’s
C
1.27
22
BC McElroy
BB&N
Gb
1.58
23
Farmers & Fishers
Mario’s
Bb
1.52
24
BB&N
The Fireplace
K
b
Category 1 PRSVs (≥ 1.25 to 1.6 gpm)
1.09
17
Harvard Mather
Harvard Currier
BC Stuart
Founding Farmers
The Fireplace
D
1.56
21
Harvard Currier
BC McElroy
Jimmy’s
The Fireplace
F
1.44
21
Harvard Mather
Founding Farmers
Farmers & Fishers
Mario’s
a – To conceal each PRSV’s model name, the operating flow rates are provided in this table instead of
tested flow rates. Since the operating flow rate in the field differed from the tested flow rate, some PRSVs
may seem to be placed in the wrong category; however, PRSVs were originally categorized based on
their tested flow rate.
b – Even taking into account the variability of flowing water pressure in the field, the operating flow rates
for PRSVs E, G, and B were much higher than expected based on their tested flow rates. The operating
flow rate for PRSV K was much lower than expected. As a result, these PRSVs were found to flow
outside of their original designated flow rate category.
4.3
Data Collection Methodology
ERG installed and monitored the PRSVs discussed in Section 4.2 to assess the following key
PRSV data parameters to help EPA evaluate its study objectives:
Flow rate;
Water use;
Use time; and
User satisfaction.
8
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
In addition, EPA assessed several other data parameters to obtain information about the PRSV
operating conditions, including:
Water temperature;
Static water pressure;
Flowing water pressure; and
Facility operations (as collected via manager surveys).
The list of equipment ERG used during the weekly visits can be found in the Pre-Rinse Spray
Valves Research Study Scope in Appendix A. The weekly site visit measurement forms used to
record the data each week are presented in Appendix B. The user satisfaction survey form can
be found in Appendix C. This section describes the how the data parameters were measured or
calculated.
4.3.1
Flow Rate
Using a bucket and stopwatch technique, ERG manually collected the PRSVs’ flow rates each
week using the settings established by the operator (operating flow rate). ERG also collected
each PRSV’s flow rate with the hot and cold faucet spigots fully open (maximum flow rate). ERG
allowed the PRSV to flow for 10 seconds into a bucket and then measured the volume of water
collected using a graduated cylinder. The measurements were converted to gpm. Each
measurement was taken three times for accuracy, and the average of the readings was used in
the data set.
4.3.2
Water Use and Use Time
To acquire water use and use time information, ERG hired a plumber to install an Elster AMCO
Water C700 water meter on the mixed hot and cold water line supplying the PRSV at each of
the participating facilities. ERG then connected a Model 100EL or 100AF Meter-Master data
logger to the water meter to record real-time water use data. A picture of a typical set-up is
shown in Figure 1.
Water
Meter
Data Logger
Figure 1. Water Meter and Data Logger Set-Up
9
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
The data logger recorded the average flow rate in gpm over 10-second intervals. ERG used a
field laptop to download the data from the data logger at each facility during weekly site visits. In
addition, ERG read the water meter at the beginning and end of each week. The water meter
readings were input into the data logger software to calibrate the data logger output in
accordance with the true measured volume of water.
ERG eliminated high and low outliers from the data set each week. Low outliers were removed
when the recorded value was below the sensitivity threshold of the water meter. High outliers
were removed when the recorded value was above the maximum flow rate of the PRSV, as
measured in the field. After excluding the outliers, the water use calculated from the data logger
output only differed from water use recorded by the water meter by 7 percent.
4.3.2.1 Water Use
To calculate the amount of water used by each PRSV for each time interval, ERG multiplied
each of the data logger’s average recorded flow rates by the 10-second time interval over which
each data point was collected (converting the 10-second time interval to minutes to perform the
calculation), as shown in the equation below.
Water Use (gallons) = [average recorded flow rate output (gpm)] × 10 seconds × 1 minute /
60 seconds
From this data, ERG summed the water use calculated for each individual 10-second interval to
determine the total amount of water each PRSV used during each three-week monitoring
period. See Table 4 for an example of the water use calculation.
4.3.2.2 Use Time
To calculate the time each PRSV was in use, ERG compared the data logger’s average
recorded flow rate over each 10-second interval to the PRSV’s maximum recorded flow rate by
the data logger. If the average recorded flow rate was equivalent to the maximum recorded flow
rate, ERG assumed that the PRSV handle was fully depressed for the entire 10-second interval.
If the average recorded flow rate was less than the maximum recorded flow rate, ERG assumed
that the PRSV was only used for a portion of the 10-second interval. For each 10-second
interval, it is possible to calculate the amount of time the PRSV was used by dividing the
average recorded flow rate in gpm for that interval by the maximum recorded flow rate, and then
multiplying this ratio by 10 seconds, as shown in the equation below. For example, if a 1.0 gpm
PRSV had an average recorded flow rate value of 0.5 gpm during a 10-second interval, it would
indicate that the PRSV was only operated for 50 percent of this 10-second period, or 5 seconds.
Use Time (seconds) = [Average Recorded Flow Rate (gpm) / Maximum Recorded Flow Rate
(gpm)] × 10 seconds
From this data, ERG summed the use time calculated for each individual 10-second interval to
determine the total amount of time each PRSV was used during each three-week monitoring
period. See Table 4 for an example of the use time calculation. Note that 1.0 gpm was the
maximum recorded flow rate in this example.
10
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table 4. Example Data Logger Output and Use Time and Water Use Calculations Using
1.0 gpm Maximum Flow Rate
Date and Time
Average Recorded Flow
Rate (gpm) during the
10 second Interval
Use Time (seconds)
Water Use (gallons)
4/1/2010 1:00:10 PM
0.00
0
0.00
4/1/2010 1:00:20 PM
0.30
4/1/2010 1:00:30 PM
0.40
4
0.07
4/1/2010 1:00:40 PM
0.80
8
0.13
4/1/2010 1:00:50 PM
0.90
9
0.15
4/1/2010 1:01:00 PM
1.00
10
0.17
4/1/2010 1:01:10 PM
1.00
10
0.17
4/1/2010 1:01:20 PM
1.00
10
0.17
4/1/2010 1:01:30 PM
1.00
10
0.17
4/1/2010 1:01:40 PM
0.80
8
0.13
4/1/2010 1:01:50 PM
0.60
6
0.10
4/1/2010 1:02:00 PM
0.20
2
0.03
4/1/2010 1:02:10 PM
0.00
0
0.00
80
1.33
= 0.30 / 1.00 × 10 = 3 = 0.30 × 10 × 1/60 = 0.05
TOTAL
4.3.3
Water Temperature
ERG collected the PRSV operating temperature and the hot water and cold water temperatures
using a bucket and a digital thermometer. The operating temperature was collected by
depressing the PRSVs without adjusting the faucet spigots, leaving the settings as the user had
them prior to the site visit. The hot and cold water temperatures were collected by completely
shutting off the opposite faucet spigot. ERG allowed the PRSV to flow so the temperature could
stabilize prior to taking each measurement. Each measurement was taken three times for
accuracy, and the average of the three readings was used in the data set. At the end of each
site visit, the water temperature was returned to the original operating temperature.
4.3.4
Water Pressure
Using a pressure adaptor and a pressure gauge, ERG collected static and flowing water
pressure each week. The pressure adaptor and pressure gauge were installed in line after the
PRSV unit’s hose and before the PRSV itself. Static pressure was collected without depressing
the PRSV handle, and flowing pressure was collected with the PRSV handle fully depressed.
Both static and flowing water pressure were collected at the operating temperature and with the
hot and cold water spigots completely open (to assess the maximum possible water pressure).
Each measurement was taken three times for accuracy, and the average of the readings was
used in the data set.
11
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
4.3.5
Surveys
ERG surveyed the PRSV users to assess their satisfaction with each PRSV installed. ERG also
surveyed the facility managers to collect important operating data to provide additional context
during data analysis. This section describes the survey methodology.
4.3.5.1 User Satisfaction
ERG collected user satisfaction data for each PRSV by interviewing one or more user at each
facility at the end of each three-week monitoring period, including the baseline monitoring
period. ERG administered the survey either verbally or in written form (in languages other than
English if necessary), depending on the preference of the user. The user satisfaction survey
form can be found in Appendix C.
The user satisfaction survey included both quantitative and qualitative questions. Specifically,
ERG asked the users to evaluate their impression of each PRSV by ranking their satisfaction as
either 1 (unsatisfied), 2 (somewhat satisfied), or 3 (completely satisfied). The users also used
this numerical ranking scheme to evaluate each PRSV’s pressure5, ability to clean dishes, and
spray pattern.
Each user was also asked additional questions about each PRSV he or she tested, including
what he or she liked or disliked about the PRSV, if he or she would consider purchasing it, if he
or she used an always-on clamp, which foods he or she found particularly difficult to remove,
and if he or she had to adjust the water temperature when using the PRSV. At the end of the
study, users were allowed to choose one of the EPAct 2005-compliant PRSVs to keep.
Following the surveys and after allowing the user to select his or her preferred PRSV, ERG
considered all responses—quantitative and qualitative—pertaining to PRSV performance and
designated an overall satisfaction score of 1, 2, or 3 from each user for each PRSV at each
facility. An example of this evaluation is shown in Table 5.
Table 5. Example Overall User Satisfaction Score Evaluation
Facility
PRSV
User
Overall Satisfaction Score Based on User Responses
How satisfied are you with the spray valve? If unsatisfied, explain.
Harvard Currier
D
User 2
2
1 (It sprays out too much
water.)
3 (The pressure is good. I like
Valve A better than Valve B.)
How satisfied are you with the spray valve's pressure? If unsatisfied,
was it too strong, too weak, produced excessive backsplash, produced
misting, other?
How satisfied are you with the dish sprayer's ability to clean the dishes? 3 (Very good.)
If unsatisfied, was it too slow, too fast, other?
5
Pressure in this context refers to the perceived force of the water spray.
12
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table 5. Example Overall User Satisfaction Score Evaluation
How satisfied are you with the spray valve's spray pattern? If
unsatisfactory, was it too wide, too focused, non-uniform coverage,
required modified use pattern, other?
If you were making the purchasing decision, would you buy this spray
valve?
What do you like about this spray valve?
What do you dislike about this spray valve?
1 (I like when it shoots out in a
stream. This one is a fan.)
Never.
The pressure is good.
When I move it around to
clean the dishes, it sprays all
over me.
In this case, the user evaluated the PRSV as being satisfactory when prompted with questions
regarding the PRSV’s pressure and ability to clean dishes. However, when asked, ―
how
satisfied are you with the spray valve?‖ the user assigned the PRSV a 1 for unsatisfied and
additionally would not purchase the PRSV if given the option. Because this user was very
satisfied with several characteristics (pressure, cleaning ability) and unsatisfied with others
(spray pattern), an overall user satisfaction score of 2 (somewhat satisfied) was given.
This same methodology was used to determine overall user satisfaction score for each PRSV
evaluated by each user on a case-by-case basis. The overall user satisfaction scores were used
to perform the user satisfaction analysis in Section 6.4.
4.3.5.2 Facility Operations
ERG asked facility managers to provide information about their establishments, such as the
type of food that the establishments serve and its hours of operation. ERG also asked the
facility managers to provide customer count information on a weekly basis and identify any
atypical business or special events (e.g., birthday celebrations, weddings, etc.). ERG used this
data to ensure that each three-week monitoring period at a facility was comparable.
A list of these facility operations questions can be found in the Pre-Rinse Spray Valves
Research Study Scope in Appendix A.
5
Limitations
Though the study resulted in an extensive data set, EPA acknowledges the following limitations
in the data collected:
Data was collected from only 10 facilities and was limited to the Washington, D.C., and
Boston, Massachusetts, areas. EPA recognizes that data from additional facilities from a
broader set of locations would be valuable, but to date no additional field data have been
shared.
The only PRSVs with ASTM F2324 test results posted on FSTC’s website are those with
cleanability times at or below 26 seconds per plate. Since EPA wanted to compare the
posted cleanability time with other key data parameters, the PRSVs included in this
study are limited to those with cleanability times below 26 seconds per plate. EPA
13
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
cannot draw any conclusions regarding PRSVs with cleanability times of more than 26
seconds per plate.
Manual measurements (water temperature, flow rate, and water pressure) were only
collected once per week during the weekly site visits. These spot measurements are not
as robust as a continuous average, especially considering that a facility’s water pressure
and temperature may fluctuate throughout the day. However, since the data were
collected each week for the three-week monitoring period, three weekly measurements
were averaged to develop a more representative water temperature, flow rate, and water
pressure data set for each PRSV at each facility.
As discussed in Section 4.2, even taking into account the variability of flowing water
pressure in the field, the operating flow rates achieved by PRSVs E, G, and B in the field
were much higher than expected based on their tested flow rates. The operating flow
rates achieved by PRSV K in the field were much lower than expected based on its
tested flow rate. This is an outstanding issue that EPA will need to investigate and
resolve prior to developing a specification.
Several PRSVs malfunctioned (leaked or broke) during the three-week monitoring
period. If the malfunction happened early in the monitoring period, a different PRSV was
installed and the monitoring period was restarted. If the malfunction was identified after
the last week of monitoring, ERG used the data in the data analysis. While EPA found
that most of the malfunctions were easy to repair, EPA is still concerned with such a high
malfunction rate over such a short period of time. EPA is considering whether PRSVs
need to undergo rigorous life cycle testing as part of its specification.
A language barrier at some facilities complicated the user satisfaction survey. ERG was
able to overcome this obstacle by administering the survey verbally in various languages
using translators where needed or by providing the written survey in non-English
languages.
The Harvard University dining hall facilities were equipped with garbage disposal troughs
that use recirculated water. Though it was not evident during the initial facility selection
site visit, it became apparent later that the users often used this recirculated stream of
water to rinse plates and dishes instead of the PRSV. As a result, the water use at the
Harvard University dining halls was low for facilities of their size and customer
throughput.
Though, in some instances, multiple users provided satisfaction survey data for a
specific PRSV at a facility, EPA could not determine the specific use time from each
individual user. Oftentimes, the users used the PRSV at different times during the same
shift, and the data logger simply continues to record use time, without differentiation to
the user. In order to log use time from individual users, continuous observation and
manual logging would have been required. Therefore, EPA used the average use time
calculated for each PRSV tested at each facility (which accounts for use time from all
users) in its analysis of the impact of use time on user satisfaction, noting that the
individual use times for each user may have been different.
14
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
6
Results
To provide data to support the research objectives outlined in Section 3, this section presents
the water use, operating flow rate, use time, cleanability times, and user satisfaction data for the
PRSVs monitored in the study, as well as an analysis of potential relationships between these
parameters. Below is a brief description of each parameter:
Water Use (gallons per day): The average daily water use of a PRSV, as calculated by
dividing the total water use in gallons during the monitoring period at a given facility by
the total number of days the PRSV was monitored.
Operating Flow Rate (gpm): The average of the weekly operating flow rate
measurements for a PRSV at a given facility.
Use Time (minutes per day): The average daily use time of a PRSV, as calculated by
dividing the total use time in minutes during the monitoring period at a given facility by
the total number of days it was monitored.
Cleanability Time (seconds per plate): Cleanability times, as determined by FSTC in
accordance with the ASTM F2324 test method. Cleanability times presented in this
report were obtained from the FSTC website.6 Cleanability times are rounded to the
nearest whole number to mask the model names of each PRSV.
User Satisfaction Score: The overall satisfaction score for a PRSV, as discussed in
Section 4.3.5.1.
EPA determined that the most objective way to analyze the data and draw conclusions was to
examine trends within a facility and compare those observed trends among those facilities. EPA
used this approach to account for the variability in operating conditions, customer throughput,7
and usage patterns among the facilities.
EPA’s goal was to evaluate the key parameters for PRSVs that are currently available in the
marketplace. As a result, EPA excluded from the analysis data from the five non-EPAct 2005compliant baseline PRSVs that were monitored, because these PRSVs can no longer be
purchased.
It is important to note that EPA’s conclusions apply only to the set of PRSVs evaluated as part
of the study and may not be applicable to all PRSVs on the market.
Table 6 provides the raw data from the EPAct 2005-compliant PRSVs monitored during the
study. The data in this table are used to support the analysis presented in this section. A more
comprehensive data set, the user satisfaction survey results, and the responses from the facility
operations surveys are provided in Appendix D.
6
The only results currently posted on FSTC’s website are from PRSVs that achieve 26 seconds per plate
or less.
7
Customer throughput was defined as the number of customers served during each monitoring period.
15
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table 6. EPAct 2005-Compliant Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Study Summary Data Set
Facility
BB&N
BC McElroy
BC Stuart
16
Farmers &
Fishers
Founding
Farmers
Harvard Currier
PRSV a
Average
Water PRSV Use
User 1’s
User 2’s
Cleanability
Operating
Use
Time
User
User
Time
Flow Rate (gallons (minutes Satisfaction Satisfaction
(seconds
(gpm) b
per day) per day)
Score
Score
per plate)
Operating
Static
Water
Pressure
(psi)
Operating
Flowing
Water
Pressure
(psi)
Operating
Water
Temp (ºF)
C
1.29
97.7
64.3
3
NA
22
67
55
116.4
E
1.54
119.8
77.6
1
NA
25
68
52
109.8
B
1.57
105.3
68.1
1
NA
24
67
51
136.1
J
0.81
90.9
111.9
1
1
21
66
64
116.0
C
1.25
114.2
92.7
2
2
22
71
67
116.2
D
1.53
153.8
99.8
2
3
21
72
64
117.7
M
1.10
19.4
19.1
3
NA
20
69
51
105.1
K
1.18
39.3
32.6
3
NA
17
78
57
118.3
I
1.29
24.4
21.2
3
NA
22
77
71
112.3
J
0.79
168.7
202.2
1
NA
21
63
61
122.2
X
1.17
199.2
182.5
2
NA
NA
62
55
126.1
G
1.41
282.3
204.4
3
NA
23
62
55
129.2
F
1.54
311.6
201.1
3
NA
21
NC
NC
127.0
L
1.07
234.3
224.9
2
NA
23
59
51
114.0
K
1.10
198.0
179.7
3
NA
17
58
42
119.2
F
1.19
191.9
157.2
3
NA
21
NC
NC
120.7
E
1.62
274.5
176.9
3
NA
25
58
44
118.3
J
0.55
7.2
10.6
1
2
21
51
48
110.3
L
1.00
11.0
11.5
3
3
23
55
50
93.2
D
1.06
11.8
11.1
1
2
21
54
49
120.1
K
1.08
12.0
11.4
3
3
17
52
48
99.0
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table 6. EPAct 2005-Compliant Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Study Summary Data Set
Facility
Harvard Mather
Jimmy's
17
Mario's
The Fireplace
PRSV a
Average
Water PRSV Use
User 1’s
User 2’s
Cleanability
Operating
Use
Time
User
User
Time
Flow Rate (gallons (minutes Satisfaction Satisfaction
(seconds
(gpm) b
per day) per day)
Score
Score
per plate)
Operating
Static
Water
Pressure
(psi)
Operating
Flowing
Water
Pressure
(psi)
Operating
Water
Temp (ºF)
N
0.51
15.9
31.7
2
NA
21
41
38
119.0
A
0.56
12.3
24.3
3
NA
21
50
46
120.5
K
0.97
29.1
31.6
3
NA
17
50
41
104.2
F
1.13
51.4
45.7
3
NA
21
NC
NC
127.0
A
0.65
57.9
89.3
1
NA
21
62
57
86.6
I
1.14
120.1
112.4
2
3
22
65
55
83.7
D
1.35
119.9
94.1
3
3
21
68
53
82.6
J
0.78
33.0
49.7
2
2
21
88
83
69.0
G
1.75
71.7
43.3
3
3
23
91
73
85.9
F
1.88
83.7
47.7
3
3
21
82
68
76.1
H
0.86
66.1
81.0
1
NA
20
68
54
113.0
D
1.04
80.3
75.7
3
NA
21
73
59
113.4
K
1.09
82.7
75.4
3
NA
17
71
52
123.2
B
1.46
82.5
58.2
3
NA
24
66
43
121.9
NA – Data were not available.
NC – Data were not collected.
a – PRSVs are coded to mask their model names.
b – Operating flow rate is provided in all cases where available. In cases where operating flow rate data were not available, maximum flow rate
was used.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
6.1
Water Use
The WaterSense program labels products that use at least 20 percent less water than standard
models. As discussed in Section 1, stakeholders were concerned that water savings from highefficiency PRSVs might be offset by users spending more time using the PRSVs to remove food
waste from dishes. To examine this issue, EPA evaluated the relationship between water use
and PRSV operating flow rates.
As shown in Figure 2, EPA plotted the water use of each PRSV installed at each facility against
its corresponding operating flow rate. The resulting graph provides a single data point for each
EPAct 2005-compliant PRSV tested at each facility. The data points from each facility are
connected with a solid line.
Figure 2. Water Use vs. Operating Flow Rate
Figure 2 shows that, in general, water use decreases when high-efficiency PRSVs are used
(i.e., the lines slope downward to the left), although the relationships do not appear to be fully
linear. Because high-efficiency PRSVs use less water, this indicates that use time does not
increase such that it completely offsets expected water savings.
6.2
Use Time
To further address its concern that use time increases with the use of high-efficiency PRSVs,
EPA examined the relationship between use time and PRSV operating flow rates.
18
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
As shown in Figure 3, EPA plotted the use time of each PRSV installed at each facility against
its corresponding operating flow rate. The resulting graph provides a single data point for each
EPAct 2005-compliant PRSV tested at each facility. The data points from each facility are
connected with a solid line.
Figure 3. Use Time vs. Operating Flow Rate
While the relationships between PRSV operating flow rate and use time are not consistent from
facility to facility, Figure 3 indicates that in, general, use time tends to remain relatively constant
regardless of the PRSV’s operating flow rate. In other words, high-efficiency PRSVs are not
consistently used longer than standard PRSVs.
6.3
Cleanability Time
As discussed in Section 1, EPA was concerned that cleanability time may not accurately
indicate whether a user will operate a PRSV for more time in the field. To examine this issue,
EPA evaluated the relationship between use time and cleanability time.
As shown in Figure 4, EPA plotted use time for each PRSV tested at each facility against its
corresponding cleanability time. The resulting graph provides a single data point for each EPAct
2005-compliant PRSV tested at each facility. The data points from each facility are connected
with a solid line.
19
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Figure 4. Use Time vs. Cleanability Time
Figure 4 shows that as the cleanability time increases, in general, use time remains relatively
constant. Therefore, cleanability time is not an indicator of the amount of time the PRSV is used
in the field for those PRSVs monitored in the study. It is important to point out that this data set
and conclusions are limited to the PRSVs that were tested, which all had cleanability times of 26
seconds per plate or less. EPA cannot draw any conclusions about the relationship between
cleanability times and use time for PRSVs that have cleanability times greater than 26 seconds
per plate.
6.4
User Satisfaction
The WaterSense program labels products that not only save water but also perform as well as
or better than standard models. As indicated in Section 1, stakeholders were concerned about
the performance of high-efficiency PRSVs, particularly those with flow rates less than 1.0 gpm.
To address this issue, EPA sought to determine whether operating flow rate, use time, or
cleanability time influences user satisfaction.
6.4.1
User Satisfaction and Flow Rate
To determine if users are less satisfied with high-efficiency PRSVs, particularly those with
operating flow rates less than 1.0 gpm, EPA compared the user satisfaction score for each
PRSV to its corresponding operating flow rate.
20
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
To facilitate the analysis, EPA grouped the PRSVs into the categories described in Section 4.2
based on their operating flow rates instead of their tested flow rates. Since the operating flow
rate in the field differed from the tested flow rate for a PRSV (as discussed in Section 4.2), and
since users were evaluating the PRSVs in the field and not in a laboratory setting, EPA grouped
the PRSVs by operating flow rate in this analysis. Figure 5 shows how often the users rated the
PRSVs in each flow rate category as satisfactory, somewhat satisfactory, or completely
satisfactory.
Figure 5. Frequency of User Satisfaction Scores Among EPAct 2005-Compliant PRSV
Categories (Categorized Using Operating Flow Rate)
Figure 5 indicates that users were generally more satisfied with the performance of PRSVs with
operating flow rates higher than 1.0 gpm.
6.4.2
User Satisfaction and Use Time
Though use time remained relatively constant, as discussed in Section 6.2, EPA evaluated if
even small changes in use time impacted user satisfaction. EPA calculated the average use
time for all of the EPAct 2005-compliant PRSVs at each facility and compared this average to
the use time and associated user satisfaction score for each individual PRSV at the facility, as
shown in Table 7.
Table 7. Average Use Time per PRSV, Facility Average Use Time, and User Satisfaction
per PRSV
Facility
BB&N
PRSV
User 1’s User
Satisfaction
Score
User 2’s User
Satisfaction
Score
C
3
NA
64.3
B
1
NA
68.1
E
1
NA
77.6
21
Average PRSV
Facility Average
Use Time
Use Time (minutes
(minutes per day)
per day)
70.0
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table 7. Average Use Time per PRSV, Facility Average Use Time, and User Satisfaction
per PRSV
Facility
BC McElroy
BC Stuart
Farmers &
Fishers
Founding
Farmers
Harvard Currier
Harvard Mather
Jimmy's
Mario's
The Fireplace
PRSV
User 1’s User
Satisfaction
Score
User 2’s User
Satisfaction
Score
Average PRSV
Facility Average
Use Time
Use Time (minutes
(minutes per day)
per day)
C
2
2
92.7
D
2
3
99.8
J
1
1
111.9
M
3
NA
19.1
I
3
NA
21.2
K
3
NA
32.6
X
2
NA
182.5
F
3
NA
201.1
J
1
NA
202.2
G
3
NA
204.4
F
3
NA
157.2
E
3
NA
176.9
K
3
NA
179.7
L
2
NA
224.9
J
1
2
10.6
D
1
2
11.1
K
3
3
11.4
L
3
3
11.5
A
3
NA
24.3
K
3
NA
31.6
N
2
NA
31.7
F
3
NA
45.7
A
1
NA
89.3
D
3
3
94.1
I
2
3
112.4
G
3
3
43.3
F
3
3
47.7
J
2
2
49.7
B
3
NA
58.2
K
3
NA
75.4
D
3
NA
75.7
1
NA
81.0
H
NA – Data were not available.
22
101.5
24.3
197.5
184.7
11.2
33.4
98.6
46.9
72.6
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
To determine if the time differential between the facility’s average use time and the PRSV’s use
time impacted user satisfaction, using the data in Table 7, EPA prepared Figure 6, which shows
when the PRSVs were used for more or less time than the average at a facility and how often
the users rated the PRSVs as unsatisfactory, somewhat satisfactory, or completely satisfactory
under both scenarios.
Figure 6. Frequency of Satisfaction Score Occurrence for PRSVs With More or Less Than
the Average Use Time at a Facility
Figure 6 shows that there is no relationship between user satisfaction and an increase or
decrease in use time for the EPAct 2005-compliant PRSVs tested in this study. PRSVs that
were used for more time than average were not rated less satisfactory more often than those
that were used for less time. Nor were the PRSVs that were used for less time than the average
rated more satisfactorily more frequently than those used for more time. Though these results
indicate that the relative change in use time did not impact user satisfaction in this study, it may
be because use time remained relatively constant among the PRSVs tested and users could not
perceive a difference in the amount of time they used each PRSV.
6.4.3
User Satisfaction and Cleanability Time
To determine if cleanability time can be used to indicate performance, EPA compared the user
satisfaction score from each user that tested each PRSV with its corresponding cleanability
time, as shown in Figure 7.
23
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Figure 7. User Satisfaction Vs. Cleanability Time
As shown in Figure 7, many PRSVs with the same cleanability time received different user
satisfaction scores. Further, there was no clear preference for PRSVs with the lowest
cleanability times, nor less preference for PRSVs with the highest cleanability times. Therefore,
cleanability time does not appear to differentiate PRSV performance for the PRSVs tested. It is
important to point out that this data set and conclusions are limited to the PRSVs that were
tested, which all had cleanability times posted on the FSTC website of 26 seconds per plate or
less. EPA cannot draw any conclusions about the relationship between cleanability times and
user satisfaction for PRSVs that have cleanability times greater than 26 seconds per plate.
6.4.4
User Satisfaction and Other Performance Characteristics
The WaterSense program develops specifications to not only differentiate water efficiency but
also performance of the products it labels. To evaluate what performance characteristics may
impact user satisfaction, EPA analyzed user responses to survey questions for PRSVs receiving
an overall user satisfaction rating of 1, meaning the users were unsatisfied. There were a total
of 56 overall user satisfaction scores, of which nine were unsatisfactory. Feedback on the
performance of the unsatisfactory PRSVs is summarized in Table 8.
For these unsatisfactory scores, four out of the nine were attributed to spray pattern, among
other factors. User preference for spray pattern was user-specific. For example, in Table 8,
multiple users evaluated PRSV J and had varying levels of satisfaction for its spray pattern.
24
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Seven out of the nine unsatisfactory scores were attributed to the ability to clean, among other
factors. Users commonly cited the cleaning ability as ―
too slow.‖ From this feedback, EPA
determined that users were concerned with what they perceived to be increased use time. EPA
analyzed use time in relation to user satisfaction in detail in Section 6.4.2 and determined that
there was no relationship between user satisfaction and use time, likely because the time
PRSVs were in use remained relatively constant.
Seven out of the nine unsatisfactory scores were also attributed to pressure, or the user
perceived force of the spray, among other factors. Most of the users indicated that weak
pressure was an issue. However, one user was unsatisfied due to backsplash, which may have
been a result of high pressure. Since several users indicated pressure (i.e., spray force) as a
reason for dissatisfaction, pressure may be a factor that EPA should consider for differentiating
PRSV performance.
EPA also considered qualitative feedback regarding what users liked or disliked about PRSVs.
Of the overall unsatisfactory scores, one user identified design characteristics as being
unsatisfactory. This user found that it was difficult to fully engage and hold down the PRSV
handle. Other users commented on design, as well, when asked what they did not like about the
PRSV; however, user satisfaction for PRSV design varied.
25
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table 8. User Satisfaction Feedback for Unsatisfactory PRSVs
Facility
User
User 1
BB&N
User 1
26
Harvard
Currier
8
How satisfied
are you with
How satisfied
the dish
Operating
are you with
sprayer's
Flow Rate
the spray
ability to clean
(gpm)
valve?
dishes?
PRSV D, Shower Spray Pattern
1.06
1 (This spray
1 (It produces
1 (The water
valve tends to
backsplash. In
comes out too
break easy. One the past when
fast.)
is already
I’ve tried this
leaking. Too
valve it has
much water
been known to
comes out and it use more
sprays right
water.)
back at you.)
PRSV B, Fan Spray Pattern
1.57
1
1 - It's very
1 - Too slow.
weak. He wants
a jet spray. This
one is more of a
showerhead. He
wants a direct,
powerful spray.
He has to work
at cleaning the
dishes.
How satisfied
are you with
the spray
valve's
pressure?8
Pressure in this context refers to the perceived force of the water spray.
How satisfied
are you with
the spray
valve's spray
pattern?
What do you
like about this
spray valve?
What do you
dislike about
this spray
valve?
1 (It comes out Nothing.
weird. Each hole
leads to water
coming out in a
criss-cross
pattern.)
The spray back.
1 - If there was Nothing.
more pressure,
the spray
pattern would be
fine. It is a bit
too wide. It
should be a jet
stream. It is
hard to spray
into the
dishwasher to
clean it off.
The pressure,
the spray
pattern because
it's too wide (but
it would be
better if it had
better pressure,
the splash back
when filling a
bucket. He feels
he can't do his
job as well.)
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table 8. User Satisfaction Feedback for Unsatisfactory PRSVs
Facility
User
User 1
The
Fireplace
User 1
27
BB&N
How satisfied
are you with
How satisfied
the dish
Operating
are you with
sprayer's
Flow Rate
the spray
ability to clean
(gpm)
valve?
dishes?
PRSV E, Fan Spray Pattern
1.54
0 (Terrible.
0 (Too weak,
0 (Too slow.
Worse pressure extremely
Dishes are dirty
than the last
weak.)
when they come
one. Pressure is
out of the
key to my job.)
dishwasher and
I have to rerinse a lot with
this spray valve.
I feel like I am
using more
water because it
takes me longer.
I am not able to
do my job.)
How satisfied
are you with
the spray
valve's
pressure?8
0.86
1
3
PRSV H, Jet Spray Pattern
3
How satisfied
are you with
the spray
valve's spray
pattern?
What do you
like about this
spray valve?
What do you
dislike about
this spray
valve?
1.5 (The spray
pattern doesn't
matter to me if
there is
pressure. A
direct spray
would be better,
but spray
pattern is not
that important.
It's hard to get
stuff that is
stuck on and
hard to clean far
places.)
Nothing. The
spray pattern is
fine but the ideal
is a straight
spray like a
showerhead
with the
massage
setting.
I don’t like the
pressure and
the ability to
clean. I don’t like
everything.
3
It's strong.
The spray is
very straight.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table 8. User Satisfaction Feedback for Unsatisfactory PRSVs
Facility
User
Operating
Flow Rate
(gpm)
0.81
BC McElroy User 2
0.81
Farmers &
Fishers
0.79
28
BC McElroy User 1
User 1
How satisfied
are you with
the spray
valve?
How satisfied
are you with
How satisfied
the dish
are you with
sprayer's
the spray
ability to clean valve's spray
dishes?
pattern?
PRSV J, Jet Spray Pattern
1 (Too weak.)
1 (Too slow, it
3
took longer to
clean the
plates.)
How satisfied
are you with
the spray
valve's
pressure?8
1 (There is no
pressure. This
has the best
design. The
spray angle and
pattern are
good.)
1 (It has no
1 (I have to get
power or
right on the
pressure.)
plate or scrub to
get the food off.
The pressure is
too weak.)
1
1 (It took too
long to clean the
plates. I like the
design, the
always-on
clamp, because
it gives my wrist
a rest.)
2 (A little weak.) 2
3 (I am able to
direct the spray
right where I
want it to go
because it is a
straight spray
pattern. I don't
like the fan
spray.)
3
What do you
like about this
spray valve?
What do you
dislike about
this spray
valve?
I like the spray
pattern, the
handle with the
always-on
clamp, and how
it is small. I like
the design.
I like the design,
the always-on
clamp, and the
spray pattern.
I do not like the
pressure- that is
the main thing. It
felt like it took
longer to clean
the plates.
I like that the
trigger can be
locked into
place.
It is difficult to
fully engage and
hold down the
handle.
There is no
pressure or
power.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table 8. User Satisfaction Feedback for Unsatisfactory PRSVs
Facility
Harvard
Currier
Jimmy’s
User
User 1
User 1
How satisfied
Operating
are you with
Flow Rate
the spray
(gpm)
valve?
0.55
1 - It comes out
different.
Weaker. It
seems like it is
spitting out
water. It is not a
solid stream.
0.65
1
How satisfied
are you with
the spray
valve's
pressure?8
1 - It is too
weak.
How satisfied
are you with
the dish
sprayer's
ability to clean
dishes?
1 - It is too slow.
It felt like it took
longer to clean
the dishes.
PRSV A, Fan Spray Pattern
1
1
How satisfied
are you with
the spray
valve's spray
pattern?
1 - It is nonuniform. It splits
and is not a
solid stream.
2
What do you
What do you
dislike about
like about this
this spray
spray valve?
valve?
The color.
He didn't like the
way the water
came out. It
seems like it
takes longer for
it to come out.
29
No good, no
pressure.
No pressure.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
7
Water and Energy Savings Potential
The results of the study can also be used to estimate the water and energy savings that can be
expected from replacing a standard PRSV with a high-efficiency PRSV. Because facility
characteristics, specifically customer throughput, determine the total water use of a facility, a
wide range of water and energy savings can be expected.
Table 9 presents the assumptions used to calculated energy use and savings. Table 10
presents the calculated annualized water and energy savings that can be expected at each of
the facilities from replacing the standard Category 1 PRSV that was monitored with highefficiency PRSVs monitored from Category 2 (tested flow rate of 1.0 to 1.25 gpm) and Category
3 (tested flow rate less than 1.0 gpm). For facilities with an existing PRSV that did not comply
with EPAct 2005, even greater savings can be expected, as shown in Table 11.
Table 9. Energy Use Assumptions and Calculations
Source of Energy to
Heat Water
Electricity
Energy Use Assumptions
Calculate how many kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity are required to heat a
gallon of water, assuming:
Specific heat of water = 1.0 British thermal unit (Btu)/pound (lb) ºF
1 gallon of water = 8.34 lbs
1 kWh = 3,412 Btu
Incoming water temperature raised from facility cold water temperature (ºF)
to operating temperature (ºF) (∆ ºF)
Water heating process is 90 percent efficient, electric hot water heater
1 gallon
1.0 BTU
1 kWh
8.34lbs
(1 lb 1 F
3,412Btu
1 gallon
∆ F
kWh/gallon
0.90
Natural Gas
Calculate how many thousand cubic feet (Mcf) of natural gas are required to heat
1,000 gallons of water, assuming:
Specific heat of water = 1.0 Btu/lb º F
1 gallon of water = 8.34 lbs
1 Therm = 99,976 Btu
Incoming water temperature raised from facility cold water temperature (ºF)
to facility operating temperature (ºF) (∆ º F)
Water heating process is 60 percent efficient, natural gas hot water heater
1 gallon
1.0 Btu
1 lb 1 F
1 Therm
8.34lbs
99,976Btu
1 gallon
∆ F
0.60
Therms
1 gallon
1,000gallons
30
1 Mcf
10,307Therms
kWh/gallon
Mcf
kgal
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table 10. Estimated Savings From Replacing Category 1 Pre-Rinse Spray Valves9
Annual Savings11
Annual Water Use (gallons)10
Category 2 Category 3
Category 1 (tested flow (tested flow
(tested flow rate of 1.0
rate less
rate of 1.25
to 1.25
than 1.0
to 1.6 gpm)
gpm)
gpm)
Replacing Category 1 PRSV With
Category 2 PRSV
Replacing Category 1 PRSV With
Category 3 PRSV
Water
(gallons)
Water
(gallons)
Electric
(kWh)
Natural
Gas (Mcf)
Electric
(kWh)
Natural
Gas (Mcf)
Educational Facilities
31
BC Stuart
9,800
6,100
4,800
3,700
400
2.0
5,000
800
4.0
BC McElroy
38,000
29,000
23,000
9,900
1,600
7.8
16,000
2,700
14
Harvard Mather
7,300–
13,000
N/A
3,100–4,000
N/A
N/A
N/A
3,300–
9,800
500–1,900
2.5–9.3
Harvard Currier
3,000–3,000
2,700
1,800
210–250
68–240
0.3–1.2
1,200–
1,200
130–290
0.6–1.5
N/A
17,000–
18,000
20,000
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
BB&N
9
Due to equipment malfunctions and other site conditions, some facilities were not able to test a PRSV in each of the flow rate categories. These
instances are denoted with ―N/A.
‖ For facilities where multiple PRSVs from the same category were installed, a range of water use and savings is
given. BB&N did not test a Category 1 PRSV, so expected savings cannot be calculated for the scenarios provided in this table.
10
As the table shows, water use varied widely by facility. For specific notes and caveats that may explain each facility’s water use, refer to the full
data set provided in Appendix D.
11
In some instances, expected water and energy use increased. For these sites, site-specific factors should be considered (notes and caveats are
discussed with the full data set in Appendix D). In addition, some of the PRSVs flowed well above their expected flow rates, as discussed further in
Section 2.2. A combination of these factors may explain some of the negative savings results.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table 10. Estimated Savings From Replacing Category 1 Pre-Rinse Spray Valves9
Annual Savings11
Annual Water Use (gallons)10
Category 2 Category 3
Category 1 (tested flow (tested flow
(tested flow rate of 1.0
rate less
rate of 1.25
to 1.25
than 1.0
to 1.6 gpm)
gpm)
gpm)
Replacing Category 1 PRSV With
Category 2 PRSV
Replacing Category 1 PRSV With
Category 3 PRSV
Water
(gallons)
Electric
(kWh)
Natural
Gas (Mcf)
Water
(gallons)
Electric
(kWh)
Natural
Gas (Mcf)
Restaurants
Farmers & Fishers
110,000
72,000–
100,000
61,000
11,000–
40,000
910–16,000
4.5–5.5
51,000
10,000
50
Mario’s a
30,000
26,000
12,000
4,300 b
- 750 b
-3.7 b
18,000
1,200
6.0
22,000
1,400
6.8
5,100–6,000
1,600–
1,700
7.7–8.3
-30,000–
-28,000 b
-1,400–
-390 b
-7.1–
-1.9 b
Jimmy’s
32
The Fireplace
43,000
a
Founding Farmers a
43,000
21,000
-89
b
29,000–
30,000
30,000
24,000
-780–100
69,000–
71,000
84,000
99,000
-15,000–
-13,000
790
b
b
420–520
3.9
b
-580–470 b
b
2.1–2.6
b
-2.9–2.3 b
a – Even taking into account the variability of flowing water pressure in the field, the operating flow rates for PRSVs E, G, and B were much higher
than expected based on their tested flow rates. The operating flow rate for PRSV K was much lower than expected. As a result, these PRSVs
actually flowed outside of their original designated flow rate category. Because they flowed outside of their flow rate category but are used here
within that original category, negative water and energy savings may be observed when comparing these PRSVs with those in other categories.
b – Energy use was calculated based on the actual temperature change required to heat the cold water to the operating temperature at a facility;
the operating temperature was often different for each PRSV. Because the temperature differential was not always consistent among the PRSVs
tested at each facility, in some cases water was saved, but energy was not, and in other cases, energy was saved, while water was not.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table 11. Estimated Savings from Replacing Non-EPAct-Complaint Pre-Rinse Spray Valves12,13
Annual Savings
Annual Water Use (gallons) 14
Category 2 Category 3
Non-EPAct- (tested flow (tested flow
Compliant
rate of 1.0
rate less
(less than
to 1.25
than 1.0
1.6 gpm)
gpm)
gpm)
Replacing Non-EPAct PRSV With
Category 2 PRSV
Replacing Non-EPAct PRSV With
Category 3 PRSV
Water
(gallons)
Electric
(kWh)
Natural
Gas (Mcf)
Water (gal)
Electric
(kWh)
Natural
Gas (Mcf)
13,000
6,100
4,800
6,400
280
1.4
7,700
680
3.4
BC McElroy
77,000
29,000
23,000
49,000
7,800
39
55,000
9,000
45
Mario’s
53,000
26,000
12,000
27,000
3,000
15
41,000
5,000
25
Jimmy’s
90,000
43,000
21,000
47,000
3,500
17
70,000
4,100
20
BB&N
35,000
17,000–
18,000
20,000
17,000–
18,000
2,500–
4,000
12–20
14,000
3,500
17
33
BC Stuart
12
Due to equipment malfunctions and other site conditions, some facilities were not able to test a PRSV in each of the flow rate categories. For
facilities where multiple PRSVs from the same category were installed, a range of water use and savings is given.
13
Only five facilities had non-EPAct-compliant PRSVs as baseline PRSVs.
14
As the table shows, water use varied widely by facility. For specific notes and caveats that may explain each facility’s water use, refer to the full
data set provided in Appendix D.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
8
Conclusions and Next Steps
EPA conducted this field study to better understand and characterize the performance and user
satisfaction associated with high-efficiency PRSVs in order to ensure that these products, if they
were to earn a WaterSense label, will be able to deliver water and energy savings.
Specifically, EPA evaluated whether water savings from high-efficiency PRSVs are offset by
users requiring more time to remove food waste from dishes. In addition, EPA evaluated
whether the ASTM F2324 performance test could be applied to indicate relative use time of
PRSVs in the field or to indicate user satisfaction.
After analyzing the data, EPA was able to evaluate the issues outlined in Section 3 and draw
the following conclusions. EPA’s conclusions only apply to the PRSVs evaluated during the
study and are not necessarily applicable to all PRSVs on the market.
Water Savings and Use Time
Conceptually, high-efficiency PRSVs are expected to use fewer gallons of water per minute,
which should result in less water use. However, an outstanding question that EPA sought to
answer was whether the expected savings from the lower flow rates are completely offset by an
increase in the amount of time users must spend to rinse the dishes.
EPA found that high-efficiency PRSVs used less total water than the standard models tested. In
addition, the time the PRSV models were used remained relatively constant, regardless of the
flow rate of the PRSVs tested. The findings indicated that, in general, high-efficiency PRSVs
saved water and did not require additional use time, thus not completely offsetting expected
water savings.
Cleanability Time
EPA also sought to determine whether the ASTM F2324 cleanability test method accurately
reflects use time in the field and whether it is a viable test for PRSV performance.
As PRSV cleanability times increased, the amount of time the PRSVs were used remained
relatively constant, indicating that cleanability time was not related to the PRSVs’ actual use
time in the field. From this data, EPA concluded that, for the PRSVs tested, cleanability time
does not accurately depict whether a user will spend more time using a PRSV.
Although the ASTM F2324 test method was originally developed to differentiate products that
use a flow restrictor to reduce flow rate without regard to performance, some groups are using it
as a method to further differentiate product performance, and have specified maximum
cleanability thresholds ranging from 21 to 30 seconds per plate, as discussed in Section 1. For
the PRSVs evaluated in this study, which had cleanability times less than 26 seconds per plate,
EPA has determined that the ASTM F2324 test method does not provide further performance
differentiation. This was evident as users did not indicate a clear preference for specific PRSVs
based upon their cleanability times.
EPA wants to be clear that it cannot draw any conclusions from this study about the relationship
between cleanability times and use time in the field for PRSVs that have cleanability times
34
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
greater than 26 seconds per plate. Therefore, EPA cannot determine if the cleanability time
requirements greater than or equal to 26 seconds per plate, as established by some groups,
differentiate performance among PRSVs and reflect actual use time in the field. Consistent with
its original intent, ASTM F2324 may be effective in differentiating products that use a flow
restrictor to reduce flow rate without regard to performance, if these products generally have
cleanability times greater than or equal to 26 seconds per plate.
User Satisfaction
In addition to understanding the water use and use time associated with high-efficiency PRSVs
and the viability of the ASTM F2324 cleanability test method to differentiate PRSV performance,
EPA evaluated user feedback to determine what factors influence user satisfaction. EPA sought
to understand whether users were less satisfied with high-efficiency PRSVs, PRSVs that require
users to spend more time rinsing dishes, or PRSVs that had higher cleanability times.
There was no relationship between user satisfaction and use time for the EPAct 2005-compliant
PRSVs tested in this study, likely because the time PRSVs were in use remained relatively
constant among the EPAct 2005-compliant PRSVs at each facility. The PRSVs that were used
for more time than average were not rated less satisfactory more frequently than those that
were used for less time. Nor were the PRSVs that were used for less time rated more
satisfactory more frequently than those used for more time.
Among the PRSVs tested, EPA found no relationship between user satisfaction and cleanability
times, indicating that cleanability time is not an indicator of performance for the PRSVs tested.
Cleanability time does not further differentiate PRSV performance below the threshold of the
products tested (26 seconds per plate).
In general, users were less satisfied with the performance of PRSVs with operating flow rates
lower than 1.0 gpm. Although the data led EPA to this conclusion in this study, flow rate may not
be the sole performance indicator for this product category.
User satisfaction findings related to spray pattern and product design were user-specific. Since
several users indicated pressure (i.e., spray force) as a reason for dissatisfaction, pressure may
be a factor that EPA should consider for differentiating PRSV performance. Currently, there is
no laboratory test method for measuring PRSV spray force.
Summary
Collectively, the study results indicate that high-efficiency PRSVs use less water and energy.
EPA found that the ASTM F2324 cleanability test did not indicate which of the PRSVs tested the
users preferred, nor was it an indicator of actual use time in the field. EPA also found that users
were less satisfied with PRSVs that flowed at less than 1.0 gpm. However, EPA concluded that
use time did not have a perceivable impact on user satisfaction in this study, which may be
because use time remained relatively constant among the PRSVs tested and users could not
perceive a difference in the amount of time they used each PRSV. Since several users indicated
pressure (i.e., spray force) as a reason for dissatisfaction, pressure may be a factor that EPA
should consider for differentiating PRSV performance.
35
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Because PRSVs have demonstrated significant water and energy savings potential, EPA will
continue working with stakeholder groups to identify and develop requirements that highefficiency PRSVs must meet in order to provide the expected performance. In addition, EPA will
evaluate other issues that became apparent throughout the study, such as addressing PRSV
life cycle testing and determining why some PRSVs may have operating flow rates far different
than their flow rates tested using the ASTM F2324 test method. EPA’s ultimate goal is to create
a specification that ensures long-term water and energy savings and acceptable performance.
36
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Appendix A:
EPA Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Research Study Scope
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
EPA Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Research Study Scope
Purpose of research on pre-rinse spray valves:
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005) restricts pre-rinse spray valve sales in the United
States to those with flow rates of 1.6 gallons per minute (gpm) or lower, as tested by the
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) F2324-03 standard test method for prerinse spray valves. ASTM F2324-03 also includes a test protocol designed to assess a pre-rinse
spray valve’s ability to remove food waste from plates that is measured in ―c
leanability,‖ or in the
time in seconds per plate cleaned. EPAct 2005 does not specify a necessary performance level
based on the cleanability portion of the test protocol.
In recent years, manufacturers have begun to meet demands for more efficient products and
have introduced ultra-high-efficiency pre-rinse spray valve models to the market with rated flow
rates of 1.0 gpm or less. These spray valves have demonstrated ASTM-tested cleanability times
equal to or better than standard models. However, minimal research has been done, particularly
with these ultra-high-efficiency spray valves, to evaluate actual field usage times, water and
energy savings, and customer satisfaction.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would like to determine if high-efficiency and
ultra-high-efficiency pre-rinse spray valves perform as well as or better than their conventional
counterparts (those with flow rates at or around the EPAct 2005 requirement of 1.6 gpm) in the
field, as performance is critical for EPA to ensure the long-term water and energy savings
associated with these products. Particularly, EPA is interested in determining whether users
spend more time removing food waste from dishes using high-efficiency and/or ultra-highefficiency pre-rinse spray valves than conventional valves, and, if so, whether the usage time
increases to the point that it negates water and energy savings and impacts user satisfaction.
Questions to be answered through independent, third-party research:
To assist in the development of a performance specification for pre-rinse spray valves, EPA
seeks data that answers the following questions:
1.
2.
3.
How do water usage and time usage vary among pre-rinse spray valves currently
on the market?
Do usage times in the field correlate to cleanability times achieved using the
ASTM F2324-03 test method?
How do flow rate, actual field usage time, and ASTM-tested cleanability time
correlate to user satisfaction?
EPA is seeking independent data to answer the above questions. Below is an outline of the
ideal research study scope.
Scope:
Goal:
For at least three weeks each, install at least one model of applicable (see next bullet)
pre-rinse spray valves from each flow rate category listed below in a minimum of
A-1
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
10 facilities, for a total of three spray valves per facility. The pre-rinse spray valves for
each facility should be made by different manufacturers whenever possible.
Category 1: pre-rinse spray valves with a rated flow rate ≥ 1.25 to 1.6 gpm;
Category 2: pre-rinse spray valves with a rated flow rate ≥ 1.0 to <1.25 gpm; and
Category 3: pre-rinse spray valves with a rated flow rate < 1.0 gpm.
Applicable pre-rinse spray valves must have posted ASTM F2324-03 test results from
the Food Service Technology Center. A list of applicable pre-rinse spray valve models
can be found at www.fishnick.com/equipment/sprayvalves.
Facilities:
Target facilities that have an existing pre-rinse spray valve with a rated flow rate of ≤1.6
gpm.15
Target facilities that use commercial pre-rinse spray valves for use with commercial
dishwashing and ware washing equipment.16
Target facilities that have a commercial dishwasher.17
Target facilities that serve on china dishware, not plasticware.18
Track facilities contacted to keep record of the number of facilities that did not qualify
because they did not meet any of the above-mentioned criteria. Track facilities that
decline to participate and document the reasoning.
Equipment Needed for Study:
Graduated pail/container (one per person collecting data);
Stop watch or watch with a second hand (one per person collecting data);
Pressure gauge and adaptor (one set per person collecting data);
Usage counters/flow totalizers or inline meter (one per facility for single water supply
line; two per facility for separate hot and cold water supply lines);
Pre-rinse spray valves (enough to have one new pre-rinse spray valve installed at each
facility during each installation period; pre-rinse spray valves should not be interchanged
among facilities as scaling or use may impact test results in later installation periods);
Wrench (one per person collecting data);
Teflon tape (one roll per person collecting data);
Thermometer (one per person collecting data);
Tape measure (one per person collecting data); and
Digital camera (one per person collecting data).
15
When recruiting participants for this field study, note that participating facilities should have EPActcompliant PRSVs already installed in the facility. EPA is not interested in studying flow rate, usage time,
and user satisfaction comparisons with PRSVs that can no longer be sold in the U.S. For accurate
comparison of models currently available on the market, EPA would like to limit facility selection to only
those facilities already using PRSVs flowing at 1.6 gpm or lower.
16
EPA is interested in looking at PRSVs that meet the EPAct 2005 definition for commercial PRSVs.
These PRSVs typically use hot water only and reduced flow rate should result in energy savings.
17
PRSVs are intended to be used for pre-cleaning dishes prior to entering a commercial dishwasher, not
for cleaning or sanitizing dishes. Targeted facilities should have a commercial dishwasher in place.
18
Targeting facilities that use china will make data more comparable to the ASTM test method, which
uses china dishes.
A-2
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Photo Documentation:
Take digital photographs and/or video clips during the installation periods to document
field conditions, pre-rinse spray valve use, and dish cleaning operations, where such
documentation will assist in data analysis.
Baseline Measurements at Participating Facilities:
Identify the make and model of the existing pre-rinse spray valve that receives the most
use and/or that is used for the purposes of pre-cleaning the dishes prior to the
commercial dishwasher. Use this pre-rinse unit for the purpose of the study.
The original valve should be monitored during the pre-installation period for at least three
weeks, and the following measurements should be taken:
Using a stop watch or a watch with a second hand and graduated pail, measure and
record the baseline flow rate of the existing pre-rinse spray valve at the beginning of
the pre-installation period.
Using a pressure gauge, measure and record the static and flowing water pressure
at least once during the pre-installation period. Water pressure should be measured
in-line prior to the spray hose (at the inlet to the spray hose) and after the spray hose
but before the pre-rinse spray valve.
Using the usage counter/flow totalizer or inline meter, measure and record the total
gallons used and/or the total time spent using the existing pre-rinse spray valve
during the pre-installation period.
Using a thermometer, measure and record the hot- and cold-water temperature from
a separate faucet (not using the pre-rinse spray valve) at the facility as many times
as is feasible during the pre-installation period. If multiple temperature
measurements are taken, average the temperatures to calculate the representative
water temperature for the pre-installation period.
Using a thermometer, measure and record the outlet water temperature (with the
mixing valves adjusted as per normal operation) from the existing pre-rinse spray
valve as many times as is feasible during the pre-installation period. If multiple
temperature measurements are taken, average the temperatures to calculate the
representative water temperature for the pre-installation period.
Provide a description and photo documentation of the entire pre-rinse unit, including
measurements of the inside hose diameter and hose length, description of hot water and
cold water supply lines (combined, separate, etc.), and descriptions of any other
important parameters.
Document and photograph the make, model, and type of dishwasher(s) present in the
facility (e.g., under counter, stationary single tank door, single tank conveyor, multiple
tank conveyor, high or low temperature unit).
At the end of the pre-installation period, spray valve operators should be interviewed
briefly to assess user satisfaction, answering at least the following questions:
Are you satisfied with the current pre-rinse spray valve?
What do you like about the valve?
What do you dislike about the valve?
What type of food/residue is particularly hard to clean from plates?
What type of dishes do you wash daily (e.g. mostly plates, pots and pans, utensils)?
Do you typically clean dishes separately or in a rack? If different for different dishes,
please explain.
A-3
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
How completely do you pre-rinse the dishes? Is your dishwasher effective in
removing waste missed by the spray valve?
Ask operator to demonstrate dish cleaning method. Observe the spray pattern,
distance spray valve is held from plate, angle at which spray valve is held, and hand
motion while cleaning the dish. Collect photo or video documentation, if possible.
Note whether the spray valve has an ―al
ways on‖ clamp. If so, ask the spray valve
operator how frequently they use the clamp.
Facility managers should provide the following business information for the preinstallation testing period:
Typical hours of facility operation;
General type of food the facility serves for each mealtime;
Number of customers served and/or volume of dishes washed (per day, per week);
Any information about atypical business (i.e., special events);
If their water is heated by electricity, natural gas, or other means;
If their pre-rinse spray valves use hot water, cold water, or both;
If there is a mixing valve on their faucet that feeds their pre-rinse spray valve; and
How long the spray valves usually last and/or how frequently they are replaced.
New Installation for Each Participating Facility:
The three pre-rinse spray valves (one from each flow rate category) should be installed
for at least three weeks each (hereafter referred to as the installation period). The test
should be a blind test—the user should not know the flow rate of the valve being
installed. The order of installation should be done at random (i.e., flow rate should not
ramp up or ramp down during the study; pre-rinse spray valve selection per week should
be randomly generated). See example schedule matrix below.
Flow Rate Category
Pre-Rinse Spray Valve
≥ 1.25 to 1.6 gpm
Model A
≥ 1.0 to <1.25 gpm
Model B
< 1.0 gpm
Model C
Week
Valve Installed
1–3
Existing Valve
4–6
Model B
7–9
Model C
10 – 12
Model A
All new pre-rinse spray valves should be installed on the existing pre-rinse units at each
facility (the only variable will be the spray valve, not the entire spray unit; spray units
may vary by location), and the following measurements should be taken:
Using a stop watch or a watch with a second hand and graduated pail, measure and
record the flow rate of each pre-rinse spray valve at the beginning of each installation
period.
Using a pressure gauge, measure and record the static and flowing water pressure
at least once during each installation period. Water pressure should be measured in-
A-4
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
line prior to the spray hose (at the inlet to the spray hose) and after the spray hose
but before the pre-rinse spray valve.
Using the usage counter/flow totalizer or inline water meter, measure and record the
total gallons used and/or the total time spent using each pre-rinse spray valve during
each installation period.
Using a thermometer, measure and record the hot- and cold-water temperatures
from a separate faucet (not using the pre-rinse spray valve) at the facility as many
times as is feasible during each installation period. If multiple temperature
measurements are taken, average the temperatures to calculate the representative
water temperature for that installation period.
Using a thermometer, measure and record the outlet water temperature (with the
mixing valves adjusted as per normal operation) from each pre-rinse spray valve as
many times as is feasible during each installation period. If multiple temperature
measurements are taken, average the temperatures to calculate the representative
water temperature for that installation period.
At the end of each installation period, spray valve operators should be interviewed briefly
to assess user satisfaction, answering at least the following questions:
Were you satisfied with the pre-rinse spray valve?
What did you like about the valve?
What did you dislike about the valve?
What type of food/residue was particularly hard to clean from plates using this prerinse spray valve?
Did you have to adjust the water temperature at all while using the valve? If so, did
you adjust it to make the water hotter or colder? Why?
What type of dishes do you wash daily (e.g. mostly plates, pots and pans, utensils)?
Do you typically clean dishes separately or in a rack? If different for different dishes,
please explain.
How completely do you pre-rinse the dishes? Is your dishwasher effective in
removing waste missed by the spray valve?
Ask operator to demonstrate dish cleaning method. Observe the spray pattern,
distance spray valve is held from plate, angle at which spray valve is held, and hand
motion while cleaning the dish. Collect photo or video documentation, if possible.
Note whether the spray valve has an ―a
lways on‖ clamp. If so, ask the spray valve
operator how frequently they used the clamp.
Facility managers should provide the following business information for each installation
period:
Number of customers served and/or volume of dishes washed (per day, per week)
Any information about atypical business (i.e., special events)
Any changes in the type of food served
At the end the study, request the most recent water quality report from the facility’s water
utility.
Data to provide to EPA:
Background information regarding the facility and installation conditions at each site,
including:
A-5
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Inside hose diameter and hose length;
Hot water and cold water spigot descriptions (combined, separate, etc.);
Dishwasher make, model, and type, including a photograph;
Hot and cold water temperature (averages, if applicable) (from a separate faucet);
Pre-rinse spray valve outlet temperature (average, if applicable);
One photograph of the pre-rinse spray unit set up from each facility;
Existing pre-rinse spray valve make and model; and
Existing pre-rinse spray valve measured flow rate, static and flowing water pressure,
and total baseline water and/or time usage recorded during the pre-installation
period.
Make, model, and measured flow rate of each pre-rinse spray valve being tested and
static and flowing water pressure, outlet water temperature (average, if applicable), and
total water and/or time usage recorded for each tested pre-rinse spray valve during each
installation period.
Hot and cold water temperature (averages, if applicable) (from a separate faucet)
collected during each installation period.
A description of the random pre-rinse spray valve installation order for each facility
(schedule matrix would suffice).
Responses to the survey of spray valve operators (one for the existing spray valve and
one for each tested model) and responses to the survey questions from each facility
manager (for baseline and each separate installation period).
Additional photographs or videos, if applicable.
The most recent water quality report from the facility’s water utility.
A-6
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Appendix B:
Weekly Site Visit Measurements Form
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study
Weekly Site Visit Measurements
Facility/Site Name: ____________________________________________________________
Week #: _____________________________________________________________________
Valve Being Monitored: ________________________________________________________
Date of Visit: _________________________________________________________________
Visit Time: ___________________________________________________________________
Date Logger ID: ______________________________________________________________
Water Meter ID: _______________________________________________________________
Equipment Needed:
Graduated pail/container (to measure flow rate, assess any issues with collecting flow
rate, and to measure water temperature);
Stop watch or watch with a second hand (to measure flow rate);
Pressure gauge and adaptor (to measure water pressure)
Thermometer (to measure water temperature);
Wrench (to remove and re-install pre-rinse spray valves);
Teflon tape (to help re-install pre-rinse spray valves);
Towel (to keep things dry and help with pre-rinse spray valve removal);
WD-40 (in case pre-rinse spray valve is difficult to remove);
Digital camera (to photograph the pre-rinse spray unit and dishwashing operations); and
In-line water meter and data logger (to monitor water use) (already installed).
1.0 Review of Previous Visit
Water meter reading from beginning of week’s collection: ______________________________
Are there any noticeable differences from the previous site visit? Are there any changes that
have since disqualified the facility from participating in the study?:
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
Do the water meter and data logger appear to be functioning correctly?
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
Does the site contact have any questions or concerns?
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
B-1
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
2.0 Water Meter Reading (when turning data logger off to download data) and Data
Download
Turn data logger off.
Water meter reading when data logger is turned off to download data: ____________________
Date and exact time of reading: ___________________________________________________
Download data, export report, and clear the data for the next one-week period.
3.0 Data Logger Maximum Flow Rate (at Operating Temperature)
Without adjusting water temperature using the faucet spigots, hook the data logger up to the
computer and the sensor. View the real-time data display in 10-second average intervals and
depress the pre-rinse spray valve fully for one minute. Record the maximum flow rate that the
data logger recognizes at the operating temperature (located at the top left of real-time screen).
Maximum flow rate from data logger at operating temperature: __________________________
4.0 Monitored Pre-Rinse Spray Valve Information
Manufacturer: _________________________________________________________________
Model: ______________________________________________________________________
Rated flow rate (including pressure tested at), if applicable: _____________________________
5.0 Operating Temperature, Flow Rate, and Pressure
Allow the pre-rinse spray valve to flow for 30 seconds to flush out water stored in the hose that
may have adjusted to room temperature.
Without adjusting water temperature using the faucet spigots, collect the operating temperature.
Operating Temperature
Trial
1
2
3
Measured Temperature of Normal Operation (°F)
Notes about operating temperature:
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
Without adjusting water temperature using the faucet spigots, collect the operating flow rate.
B-2
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Operating Flow Rate
Trial
1
2
3
Measured Flow Rate in gallons/ minute
(mL/seconds * (1 gallon/ 3,785.41178
mL) * (60 seconds/minute) =
gallons/minute)
Measured Flow Rate in
milliliters/second(s)
Notes about operating flow rate:
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
Still without adjusting water temperature using the faucet spigots, if possible, turn off the hot and
cold water shut-off valves below the sink, and install the pressure adaptor and pressure gauge.
Collect static and flowing water pressure by turning the shut-off valves under the sink back on
(not adjusting the faucet spigots). If shut-off valves are not available, mark this section not
applicable and note it.
Operating Static and Flowing Water Pressure
Trial
1
2
3
Static Pressure (psi)
Flowing Pressure (psi)
Additional Water-using
Equipment On During Trial
Notes about water pressure:
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
Turn the below-sink shut-off valves off to remove the pressure adaptor and pressure gauge.
Turn the shut-off valves back on to allow water to flow for the cold and hot water temperature
measurements.
6.0 Hot and Cold Water Temperature
Opening the cold water spigot completely (closing the hot water), then opening the hot water
spigot completely (closing the cold water), collect hot and cold water temperature. Allow cold or
hot water to flow through the hose for 30 seconds before taking measurements for temperature
to adjust.
B-3
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Hot and Cold Water Temperature
Trial
1
2
3
Measured Temperature of Cold Water (°F)
Measured Temperature of Hot Water (°F)
Notes about cold and hot water temperature:
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
7.0 Maximum Flow Rate and Water Pressure
Opening the hot and cold water spigots completely, collect the maximum flow rate.
Maximum Flow Rate
Trial
1
2
3
Measured Flow Rate in gallons/ minute
(mL/seconds * (1 gallon/ 3,785.41178 mL) *
(60 seconds/minute) = gallons/minute)
Measured Flow Rate in
milliliters/second(s)
Notes about maximum flow rate:
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
Turn the hot and cold water spigots (or the below-sink shut-off valves) off completely to install
the pressure adaptor and pressure gauge. Open the below-sink shut-off valves (if turned off)
and the hot and cold water spigots completely, and collect static and flowing water pressure.
Maximum Static and Flowing Water Pressure
Trial
1
2
3
Static Pressure (psi)
Flowing Pressure (psi)
Additional Water-using
Equipment On During Trial
Notes about maximum water pressure:
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
B-4
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
8.0 Return Water Temperature to Operating
Return the water temperature to the facility’s operating temperature (measured above) by
adjusting the spigots how they were upon arriving and confirming with a temperature
measurement (coming as close to the average operating temperature measured above as
possible).
9.0 Conduct User Satisfaction Survey then Install New Pre-Rinse Spray Valve (if
applicable)
If this is a pre-rinse spray valve change week, conduct the user satisfaction survey. Then, install
the new pre-rinse spray valve.
10.0
Water Meter Reading (when turning data logger back on to record data)
Turn data logger on.
Water meter reading when data logger is turned back on to record data: ___________________
Date and exact time of reading: ___________________________________________________
11.0
Other Issues Noted
List any issues that may affect quality of data collected. This can include technical complications
or issues obtaining survey results from staff.
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
B-5
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Appendix C:
User Satisfaction Survey
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study
User Satisfaction Survey
Facility/Site Name: ____________________________________________________________
Week #: _____________________________________________________________________
Valve Being Monitored: ________________________________________________________
Date of Visit: _________________________________________________________________
Name of Operator: ____________________________________________________________
Questions Asked During Every Survey
1. On a scale from 1 to 3 (1 for unsatisfied, 2 somewhat satisfied, and 3 for completely
satisfied), how satisfied are you with the dish sprayer? If unsatisfied, explain.
2. On a scale from 1 to 3 (1 for unsatisfied, 2 somewhat satisfied, and 3 for completely
satisfied), how satisfied are you with the dish sprayer's pressure? If unsatisfied, was it
too strong, too weak, produced excessive backsplash, produced misting, other?
3. On a scale from 1 to 3 (1 for unsatisfied, 2 somewhat satisfied, and 3 for completely
satisfied), how satisfied were you with the dish sprayer’s ability to clean the dishes? If
unsatisfied, was it too slow, too fast, other?
4. On a scale from 1 to 3 (1 for satisfied, 2 for somewhat satisfied, 3 for unsatisfied), how
satisfied were you with the dish sprayer’s spray pattern? If unsatisfactory, was it too
wide, too focused, non-uniform coverage, required modified use pattern, other?
C-1
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
5. Did you have to adjust the water temperature when using this pre-rinse spray valve? If
so, did you make it hotter or colder? Why?
6. If you were making the purchasing decision, would you buy this dish sprayer?
7. What do you like about the dish sprayer?
8. What do you dislike about the dish sprayer?
9. What type of food/residue is particularly hard to clean from plates with this dish sprayer?
10. Do you ever use something to hold this dish sprayer in the on position so it is constantly
spraying (rather than manually holding it on)? If so, what do you use to hold it on and
how often do you do this?
11. Can you demonstrate your dish cleaning method? We would like to observe you
cleaning the dishes as you normally would and collect a photo or video (not including
your face, but showing how you are cleaning the dishes). Is this okay?
C-2
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Questions Asked Only During Baseline (first) Survey
12. What type of dishes do you wash daily (e.g. mostly plates, pots and pans, utensils)?
13. Do you typically clean dishes separately or in a rack? If different for different dishes,
please explain.
14. How completely do you rinse the dishes? Is your dishwasher effective in removing waste
missed by the spray valve?
C-3
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Appendix D:
Data, User Satisfaction Survey Responses, and Facility Operations
Survey Responses
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-1. Harvard University Mather House Data
Harvard University Mather House
PRSV
K
A
PRSV
Existing
1st New
Valve
Flow rate category (1 = high, 2 = mid, 3 = low)
1
3
Spray pattern
Fan
Fan
Week
Weeks 1–3 Weeks 4–6
Total days used (days)
20.90
20.92
Total customer count
13,774
14,221
WATER USED
Total water used (gallons)
607.3
256.9
Water used per day (gallons per day)
29.1
12.3
TIME USED
Total time used (minutes)
661.4
509.0
Time used per day (minutes per day)
31.6
24.3
DATA MEASURED WEEKLY
Operating static water pressure (psi)
NC
NC
Operating flowing water pressure (psi)
NC
NC
Maximum static water pressure (psi)
50
50
Maximum flowing water pressure (psi)
41
46
Operating water temperature (°F)
104.2
120.5
Cold water temperature (°F)
54.2
61.7
Hot water temperature (°F)
118.5
124.3
Operating measured flow rate (gpm)
NC
NC
Maximum measured flow rate (gpm)
0.97
0.56
Cleanability
17
21
USER SATISFACTION
Overall user satisfaction (1 = unsatisfied, 2 =
3
3
somewhat satisfied, 3 = completely satisfied)
F
2nd New
Valve
1
Shower
Weeks 7–9
20.94
12,793
N
4th New
Valve
3
Fan
Weeks 11–13
19.82
13,825
1077.4
51.4
314.6
15.9
957.8
45.7
629.1
31.7
NC
NC
NC
NC
127.0
59.6
129.5
1.13
1.27
21
41
38
44
40
119.0
74.3
125.7
0.51
0.58
21
3
2
NC – Not collected.
Blue highlight designates the PRSV the user selected to keep.
NOTES:
Harvard Mather House is an undergraduate residence hall on the Harvard University campus. It serves all
meals (breakfast, lunch, dinner, and sometimes snacks) and offers a very diverse cuisine.
Valve M was originally slated as the third valve. After the first week of testing (week 10), the spray head
fell off and completely fell apart. After replacing Valve M with Valve N, a full three week's worth of data
was collected (weeks 11-13).
Harvard Mather’s garbage disposal system runs recirculated water through a trough where the PRSV
user can dump food. Oftentimes, the PRSV user used the running flow to rinse the dishes rather than
using the PRSV. The PRSV at this site was rarely used, so time usage and water usage may be low for a
facility of this size.
D-1
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-2. Harvard University Mather House User Satisfaction Survey Responses
User Information
Harvard University Mather House
One user was interviewed at Harvard Mather House. He speaks Haitian Creole as his first
language, French as his second language, and some English as his third. The user was
interviewed verbally in French.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
4th New Valve
K
A
F
N
3
3
3
2
D-2
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction Score Based on All
Responses
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
How satisfied are you with the spray valve? 3
3
3
If unsatisfied, explain.
How satisfied are you with the spray valve's 3
3
3
pressure? If unsatisfied, was it too strong,
too weak, produced excessive backsplash,
produced misting, other?
How satisfied are you with the dish
3
2
3
sprayer's ability to clean the dishes? If
unsatisfied, was it too slow, too fast, other?
How satisfied are you with the spray valve's NA
NA
3
spray pattern? If unsatisfactory, was it too
wide, too focused, non-uniform coverage,
required modified use pattern, other?
Do you have to adjust the water
NA
NA
I always use a little hot
temperature when using this spray valve? If
water and a little cold,
so, did you make it hotter or colder? Why?
but more hot.
If you were making the purchasing decision, NA
NA
Yes, it's good; perfect.
would you buy this spray valve?
What do you like about this spray valve?
It has normal pressure. It's not too strong. The It's not too fast but not
I don't always use the
water doesn't come out too slow.
spray valve (only with
too quickly.
food that sticks).
What do you dislike about this spray valve? Nothing.
Nothing.
Nothing. It's perfect.
1 (I am not satisfied
with it. It is too slow.)
2 (The pressure is too
slow.)
2 (It would be okay if
the pressure was
better.)
3
I use a mix of hot and
cold.
I don't know.
I like how it feels.
I do not like the
pressure.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-2. Harvard University Mather House User Satisfaction Survey Responses
User Information
Harvard University Mather House
One user was interviewed at Harvard Mather House. He speaks Haitian Creole as his first
language, French as his second language, and some English as his third. The user was
interviewed verbally in French.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
4th New Valve
K
A
F
N
3
3
3
2
D-3
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction Score Based on All
Responses
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
What type of food/residue is particularly
Sticky rice, eggs, food Food left overnight on Trays/food from
hard to clean from plates with this spray
left on a plate that has plates is very hard to
overnight, and eggs on
valve?
been sitting for awhile, clean. Eggs in the
a plate that went
sticky foods.
microwave sticks to
through the microwave.
plates.
Do you ever use something to hold the
No, I just use it
No, I don't need the
No.
spray valve in the on position so it is
manually.
clamp. Sometimes I
constantly spraying (rather than manually
use the adjacent
holding it on)? If so, what do you use to hold
hose/sprayer (on a reel
it on and how often do you do this?
with a higher flow rate)
to fill up the sink and I
would like a clamp for
it. (NOTE: this wash
down sprayer was not
part of our study.)
What type of dishes do you wash daily (e.g., Plates, bowls,
Plates, glasses, bowls, Plates, glasses, trays,
mostly plates, pots and pans, utensils)?
silverware, trays.
trays.
some pots and pans.
Do you typically clean dishes separately or Rack.
Rack.
Rack.
in a rack? If different for different dishes,
please explain.
How completely do you rinse the dishes? Is Mostly clean.
The dishwasher is
NA
your dishwasher effective in removing waste
good.
missed by the spray valve?
Additional Comments
None.
None.
None.
Food that is left
overnight.
No.
NA
NA
NA
None.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-2. Harvard University Mather House User Satisfaction Survey Responses
User Information
Harvard University Mather House
One user was interviewed at Harvard Mather House. He speaks Haitian Creole as his first
language, French as his second language, and some English as his third. The user was
interviewed verbally in French.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
4th New Valve
K
A
F
N
3
3
3
2
D-4
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction Score Based on All
Responses
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
ERG Notes
The user seemed to be using the garbage disposal (which had a trough
with recirculated running water to rinse food down the drain) to clean
plates rather than the spray valve. He turned off the garbage disposal
when it was not in use. Another user just pushed the plates through the
dishwasher without spraying them down.
The user chose to keep
this spray valve even
though he gave it the
worst satisfaction
scores. The user
seemed to be using the
garbage disposal
(which had a trough
with recirculated
running water to rinse
food down the drain) to
clean plates rather than
the spray valve. He
turned off the garbage
disposal when it was
not in use. Another
user just pushed the
plates through the
dishwasher without
spraying them down.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-3. Harvard University Mather House Facility Operations Survey Responses
Questions
Typical hours of facility operation
General type of food the facility serves for each mealtime
Number of customers served and/or volume of dishes washed (per day, per
week)
Any information about atypical business (i.e., special events)
D-5
Whether water is heated by electricity, natural gas, or other means
Whether pre-rinse spray valves use hot water, cold water, or both
Whether a mixing valve on the faucet feeds the pre-rinse spray valve
How long the spray valves usually last and/or how frequently they are replaced
Any changes in the type of food served
Responses
7:30am–10am, 12pm–2:15pm, 5pm–7:15pm
Various cuisine for breakfast, lunch, and dinner
Provided in data tables above
During the baseline monitoring period, the facility had a festive
meal that may have resulted in an increase in customer count,
and a long weekend occurred that may have resulted in a
decrease in customer count. During the first new valve
monitoring period, President’s Day weekend may have caused
decreased customer count and a parent’s weekend may have
caused increased customer counts.
Steam
Both
No
The spray valves last approximately two years
None
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-4. Harvard University Currier House Data
Harvard University Currier House
K
L
Existing
1st New
Valve
Flow rate category (1 = high, 2 = mid, 3 = low)
1
2
Spray pattern
Fan
Fan
Week
Weeks 1–3 Weeks 4–6
Total days used (days)
20.90
20.92
Total customer count
14,954
14,172
WATER USED
Total water used (gallons)
250.6
230.0
Water used per day (gallons per day)
12.0
11.0
TIME USED
Total time used (minutes)
238.3
240.2
Time used per day (minutes per day)
11.4
11.5
DATA MEASURED WEEKLY
Operating static water pressure (psi)
NC
NC
Operating flowing water pressure (psi)
NC
NC
Maximum static water pressure (psi)
52
55
Maximum flowing water pressure (psi)
48
50
Operating water temperature (°F)
99.0
93.2
Cold water temperature (°F)
58.5
58.2
Hot water temperature (°F)
121.3
121.6
Operating measured flow rate (gpm)
NC
NC
Maximum measured flow rate (gpm)
1.08
1.00
Cleanability
17
23
USER SATISFACTION
User 1’s overall user satisfaction (1 =
3
3
unsatisfied, 2 = somewhat satisfied, 3 =
completely satisfied)
User 2’s overall user satisfaction (1 =
3
3
unsatisfied, 2 = somewhat satisfied, 3 =
completely satisfied)
PRSV
PRSV
D
J
2nd New 3rd New Valve
Valve
1
3
Shower
Jet
Weeks 7–9 Weeks 10–12
20.93
21.48
13,173
15,379
247.7
11.8
153.7
7.2
233.0
11.1
227.6
10.6
54
49
55
51
120.1
58.2
120.9
1.06
1.08
21
51
48
51
49
110.3
68.4
115.8
0.55
0.66
21
1
1
2
2
NC – Not collected.
Blue highlight designates the PRSV the users selected to keep.
NOTES:
Harvard Currier House is an undergraduate residence hall on the Harvard University campus. It serves all
meals (breakfast, lunch, dinner, and sometimes snacks) and offers a very diverse cuisine.
Harvard Currier has a garbage disposal system that runs recirculated water through a trough where the
user can dump food. Oftentimes, users use the running flow to rinse the dishes rather than using the
PRSV. In addition, this site had a second PRSV on a hose that kitchen staff draped over the garbage
disposal and used to clean dishes sometimes. Both the PRSV on the unit before the dishwasher (the one
metered and monitored for the study) and PRSV on the hose draped over the garbage disposal were
D-6
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
replaced with the new PRSVs monitored, so the users could accurately evaluate their satisfaction. The
PRSV on the unit before the dishwasher at this site was rarely used, so time usage and water usage may
be low for a facility of this size.
D-7
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-5. Harvard University Currier House User Satisfaction Survey Responses
D-8
Harvard University Currier House
Two users were interviewed at Harvard Currier House. User 1 worked the morning/day shift (~7–~3 p.m.) and User 2
User Information
worked the night shift (~3–~9 p.m.). Both users were native English speakers. The survey was administered to them
verbally in English.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
PRSV
K
L
D
J
PRSV
3
3
3
3
1
2
1
2
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
Provided By
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
How satisfied are
3
3 (I use the
3 (I am very 3
1 (This
1 (It sprays
1 (It comes 1 (It doesn't
you with the spray
spray valve to
satisfied.)
spray valve out too much out different. seem as
valve? If unsatisfied,
clean the
tends to
water.)
Weaker. It
good as the
explain.
dishes and to
break easy.
seems like it others.)
clean up around
One is
is spitting
the dish room.)
already
out water. It
leaking. Too
is not a solid
much water
stream.)
comes out
and it sprays
right back at
you.)
How satisfied are
3
3
3
3
1 (It
3 (The
1 (It is too
2 (It is a
you with the spray
produces
pressure is
weak.)
little weak
valve's pressure? If
backsplash. good. I like
but it didn't
unsatisfied, was it
In the past
Valve L
produce
too strong, too weak,
when I've
better than
excessive
produced excessive
tried this
Valve D.)
backsplash
backsplash,
valve it has
or misting.)
produced misting,
been known
other?
to use more
water.)
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-5. Harvard University Currier House User Satisfaction Survey Responses
D-9
Harvard University Currier House
Two users were interviewed at Harvard Currier House. User 1 worked the morning/day shift (~7–~3 p.m.) and User 2
User Information
worked the night shift (~3–~9 p.m.). Both users were native English speakers. The survey was administered to them
verbally in English.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
PRSV
K
L
D
J
PRSV
3
3
3
3
1
2
1
2
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
Provided By
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
How satisfied are
3
3
3
3
1 (The water 3 (Very
1 (It is too
3
you with the dish
comes out
good.)
slow. It felt
sprayer's ability to
too fast.)
like it took
clean the dishes? If
longer to
unsatisfied, was it
clean the
too slow, too fast,
dishes.)
other?
How satisfied are
NA
NA
NA
NA
1 (It comes 1 (I like when 1 (It is non- 2 (It's a little
you with the spray
out weird.
it shoots out uniform. It
too straight.
valve's spray
Each hole
in a stream. spits and is I want a
pattern? If
leads to
This one is a not a solid
little fan.)
unsatisfactory, was it
water
fan.)
stream.)
too wide, too
coming out
focused, non-uniform
in a crisscoverage, required
cross
modified use pattern,
pattern.)
other?
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-5. Harvard University Currier House User Satisfaction Survey Responses
D-10
Harvard University Currier House
Two users were interviewed at Harvard Currier House. User 1 worked the morning/day shift (~7–~3 p.m.) and User 2
User Information
worked the night shift (~3–~9 p.m.). Both users were native English speakers. The survey was administered to them
verbally in English.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
PRSV
K
L
D
J
PRSV
3
3
3
3
1
2
1
2
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
Provided By
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
Do you have to
NA
NA
NA
NA
No.
No.
No.
No. I leave
adjust the water
it the way it
temperature when
is. I never
using this spray
touch it
valve? If so, did you
from the
make it hotter or
way it was.
colder? Why?
Other users
may adjust
it, but not
me.
If you were making
NA
NA
NA
NA
No.
Never.
No.
No.
the purchasing
decision, would you
buy this spray valve?
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-5. Harvard University Currier House User Satisfaction Survey Responses
D-11
Harvard University Currier House
Two users were interviewed at Harvard Currier House. User 1 worked the morning/day shift (~7–~3 p.m.) and User 2
User Information
worked the night shift (~3–~9 p.m.). Both users were native English speakers. The survey was administered to them
verbally in English.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
PRSV
K
L
D
J
PRSV
3
3
3
3
1
2
1
2
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
Provided By
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
What do you like
The wide spray
It has a good
I like the way I think it
Nothing.
The pressure The color.
The water
about this spray
pattern.
spray. It is
the water
works well,
is good.
pressure is
valve?
convenient.
comes out of has good
okay.
the nozzle,
pressure,
the wide
cleans the
spray and the dishes well,
rubber
doesn't
dishguard
splash, has
bumper.
a good
spray
pattern. The
spray itself
is excellent
and the way
it cleans is
excellent.
There was
no
backsplash.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-5. Harvard University Currier House User Satisfaction Survey Responses
D-12
Harvard University Currier House
Two users were interviewed at Harvard Currier House. User 1 worked the morning/day shift (~7–~3 p.m.) and User 2
User Information
worked the night shift (~3–~9 p.m.). Both users were native English speakers. The survey was administered to them
verbally in English.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
PRSV
K
L
D
J
PRSV
3
3
3
3
1
2
1
2
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
Provided By
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
What do you dislike Nothing.
Nothing.
I would like
Nothing.
The spray
When I move I don't like
I don't like
about this spray
an always-on
back.
it around to
the way the the straight
valve?
clamp.
clean the
water comes spray. I like
dishes, it
out. It
more of a
sprays all
seems like it fan, but not
over me.
takes longer one that
for it to
causes
come out.
backsplash.
I want one
that sprays
downward
but fans out
a little.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-5. Harvard University Currier House User Satisfaction Survey Responses
D-13
Harvard University Currier House
Two users were interviewed at Harvard Currier House. User 1 worked the morning/day shift (~7–~3 p.m.) and User 2
User Information
worked the night shift (~3–~9 p.m.). Both users were native English speakers. The survey was administered to them
verbally in English.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
PRSV
K
L
D
J
PRSV
3
3
3
3
1
2
1
2
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
Provided By
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
What type of
I let plates soak in Cheese and
Food that is Eggs over
Lasagna.
None really. Mac and
Stuff that is
food/residue is
hot water if they
chili.
two or three easy and
Some nights cheese and taken to the
particularly hard to
need to. Eggs,
days old.
hardened
the food is
mashed
students'
clean from plates
food left on a plate
Students
food.
more gooey potatoes.
rooms and
with this spray
longer than 3
leave plates
but it all
left to dry.
valve?
days, melted
upstairs in
comes off.
Ketchup
cheese, and
their room
and peanut
chicken are hard
and bring it
butter
to remove.
back later.
harden. I
have to
soak these
dishes to
loosen
them.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-5. Harvard University Currier House User Satisfaction Survey Responses
D-14
Harvard University Currier House
Two users were interviewed at Harvard Currier House. User 1 worked the morning/day shift (~7–~3 p.m.) and User 2
User Information
worked the night shift (~3–~9 p.m.). Both users were native English speakers. The survey was administered to them
verbally in English.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
PRSV
K
L
D
J
PRSV
3
3
3
3
1
2
1
2
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
Provided By
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
Do you ever use
I use the alwaysNo, I only use
I like to use
I only use
Yes, every
Once in a
Yes, every
Sometimes
something to hold
on clamp. If I hold my hand.
the alwaysmy hand to so often but good while. I so often I
I use the
the spray valve in
the spray valve on
on clamp.
manually
not all the
use the
use the
always-on
the on position so it all the time it
work the
time.
always-on
always-on
clamp to
is constantly
makes my hands
spray valve. Everyday,
clamp more clamp.
add hot
spraying (rather than sore.
but not all
on the spray
water to the
manually holding it
the time.
valve on the
garbage
on)? If so, what do
hose (NOTE:
disposal
you use to hold it on
This one was
trough.
and how often do
not metered).
you do this?
What type of dishes Plates, utensils,
NA
Everything
NA
China
Plates,
NA
NA
do you wash daily
cups, not many
except pots,
dishes,
bowls, cups,
(e.g., mostly plates, pots and pans,
sometimes
utensils,
glasses,
pots and pans,
food containers.
wash certain
glasses,
dessert
utensils)?
types of
mugs, trays; plates, trays,
pans.
sometimes
silver
special
platters.
types of pots
and pans.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-5. Harvard University Currier House User Satisfaction Survey Responses
D-15
Harvard University Currier House
Two users were interviewed at Harvard Currier House. User 1 worked the morning/day shift (~7–~3 p.m.) and User 2
User Information
worked the night shift (~3–~9 p.m.). Both users were native English speakers. The survey was administered to them
verbally in English.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
PRSV
K
L
D
J
PRSV
3
3
3
3
1
2
1
2
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
Provided By
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
Do you typically
I spray the dishes Separately.
Separately. I Separately. Rack (for
I don't use
NA
NA
clean dishes
off separately and
find it more
dishwasher). the spray
separately or in a
then put them in a
effective to
valve on the
rack? If different for rack to go through
not use the
unit a lot. I
different dishes,
the dishwasher.
rack.
use the spray
please explain.
valve on the
hose. I clean
the dishes
separately.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-5. Harvard University Currier House User Satisfaction Survey Responses
D-16
Harvard University Currier House
Two users were interviewed at Harvard Currier House. User 1 worked the morning/day shift (~7–~3 p.m.) and User 2
User Information
worked the night shift (~3–~9 p.m.). Both users were native English speakers. The survey was administered to them
verbally in English.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
PRSV
K
L
D
J
PRSV
3
3
3
3
1
2
1
2
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
Provided By
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
How completely do
I remove big
I clean the
The
I rinse the
Yes.
I do not clean NA
NA
you rinse the
chunks of food but dishes until they dishwasher is dishes
the dishes
dishes? Is your
leave minor
are almost
effective
completely
completely.
dishwasher effective residue.
clean/clean.
because it is so there is
The
in removing waste
Sometimes I
The dishwasher really hot
no food left
dishwasher
missed by the spray completely clean
is used to
(~200
on the plate.
gets
valve?
the dishes, but I try sterilize the
degrees F).
The dishes
everything.
not to so I can let dishes only.
have to be
Once in a
the machine do
clean before
while I'll have
what it is
they go into
to run a dish
supposed to do.
the machine
through the
The dishwasher is
or it would
dishwasher
effective.
break the
twice.
Sometimes
dishwasher.
utensils have to go
through twice.
Sometimes dishes
have to go through
twice if the dish
room is really
busy.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-5. Harvard University Currier House User Satisfaction Survey Responses
D-17
Harvard University Currier House
Two users were interviewed at Harvard Currier House. User 1 worked the morning/day shift (~7–~3 p.m.) and User 2
User Information
worked the night shift (~3–~9 p.m.). Both users were native English speakers. The survey was administered to them
verbally in English.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
PRSV
K
L
D
J
PRSV
3
3
3
3
1
2
1
2
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
Provided By
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
Additional
I use the spray
This spray
I like Valve L I use the
I don't like
Valve D has I don't use
I use the
Comments
valve on the hose valve has spray better than
spray valve the spray
too much
the spray
spray valve
more often than
back/misting.
Valve K. The to clean the pattern. It is backsplash
valve on the on the unit
the one on the
spray pattern sink. I rinse too powerful and sprays
unit much
to clean up.
unit. I use the
for the Valve the dishes
and it seems on you. I
except to
garbage disposal
K is the same in the
like it wastes don't like it.
clean the
water to clear off
as that for
running
water.
dish room.
dishes the most.
Valve L, but water from
This spray
Valve L has a the garbage
valve is too
rubber
disposal
weak.
dishguard
first and this
bumper
rinses them
which is good adequately
in case it is
for the most
dropped.
part.
(NOTE: He
(NOTE: He
chose to
chose to
keep this
keep this
spray valve.) spray
valve.)
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-5. Harvard University Currier House User Satisfaction Survey Responses
D-18
Harvard University Currier House
Two users were interviewed at Harvard Currier House. User 1 worked the morning/day shift (~7–~3 p.m.) and User 2
User Information
worked the night shift (~3–~9 p.m.). Both users were native English speakers. The survey was administered to them
verbally in English.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
PRSV
K
L
D
J
PRSV
3
3
3
3
1
2
1
2
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
Provided By
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
ERG Notes
This site has two spray valves: one on a unit before the dishwasher (which was equipped with a meter and a data logger)
and another on a hose that hung over the garbage disposal dish trough (which was not metered or monitored). The users
seemed to be using the garbage disposal (which had a trough with recirculated running water to rinse food down the drain)
to clean plates rather than either spray valve.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-6. Harvard University Currier House Facility Operations Survey Responses
Questions
Typical hours of facility operation
General type of food the facility serves for each mealtime
Number of customers served and/or volume of dishes washed (per day, per
week)
Any information about atypical business (i.e., special events)
Whether water is heated by electricity, natural gas, or other means
Whether PRSVs use hot water, cold water, or both
Whether a mixing valve on the faucet feeds the pre-rinse spray valve
How long the spray valves usually last and/or how frequently they are replaced
Any changes in the type of food served
Responses
7:30 a.m.–10 a.m., 12 p.m.–2:30 p.m., 5 p.m.–7:30 p.m.
Various cuisine for breakfast, lunch, and dinner
Provided in data tables above
None
Steam
Both
No
Once per year
None
D-19
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-7. Boston College McElroy Commons Data
Boston College McElroy Commons
PRSV
Z1
D
st
PRSV
Existing
1 New
Valve
Flow rate category (1 = high, 2 = mid, 3 = low)
N/A
1
Spray pattern
Shower
Shower
Week
Weeks 1–3 Weeks 4–6
Total days used (days)
21.11
20.94
Total customer count
106,270
101,201
WATER USED
Total water used (gallons)
6537.8
3220.4
Water used per day (gallons per day)
309.7
153.8
TIME USED
Total time used (minutes)
1724.3
2090.3
Time used per day (minutes per day)
81.7
99.8
DATA MEASURED WEEKLY
Operating static water pressure (psi)
NC
NC
Operating flowing water pressure (psi)
NC
NC
Maximum static water pressure (psi)
69
72
Maximum flowing water pressure (psi)
39
64
Operating water temperature (°F)
117.6
117.7
Cold water temperature (°F)
NC
NC
Hot water temperature (°F)
117.6
117.7
Operating measured flow rate (gpm)
NC
NC
Maximum measured flow rate (gpm)
3.66
1.53
Cleanability
N/A
21
USER SATISFACTION
User 1’s overall user satisfaction (1 =
3
2
unsatisfied, 2 = somewhat satisfied, 3 =
completely satisfied)
User 2’s overall user satisfaction (1 =
1
3
unsatisfied, 2 = somewhat satisfied, 3 =
completely satisfied)
C
2 New
Valve
2
Jet
Weeks 7–9
20.92
102,111
J
3 New Valve
2388.5
114.2
1909.0
90.9
1938.3
92.7
2350.4
111.9
71
67
71
68
116.2
56.8
117.7
1.25
1.27
22
66
64
66
64
116.0
60.5
116.0
0.81
0.82
21
2
1
2
1
nd
rd
3
Jet
Weeks 10–12
21.00
110,258
NC – Not collected.
Blue highlight designates the PRSV the users selected to keep.
NOTES:
Boston College McElroy Commons is a large dining facility on Boston College's main campus. It serves
breakfast, lunch, dinner, and late night food, has thousands of customers a day, and offers a very diverse
cuisine.
This site had two PRSVs that were used side-by-side for the same purpose. It was a duplicate set up.
ERG chose to monitor one of the two PRSVs with a data logger. Both PRSVs were replaced with the new
PRSVs monitored, so the users could accurately evaluate their satisfaction.
D-20
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
When selecting the PRSV to keep, several users discussed the question. They decided that they liked
both Valve D and Valve C and decided to keep one on each of their two units.
D-21
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-8. Boston College McElroy Commons User Satisfaction Survey Responses
D-22
Boston College McElroy Commons
Two users were interviewed at BC McElroy. Both worked the night shift (~3–9 p.m.). Both users were native English
User Information
speakers. The survey was administered verbally and the users provided responses verbally.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
PRSV
Z1
D
C
J
PRSV
3
1
2
3
2
2
1
1
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
Provided By
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
How satisfied are
3
1 (I would like 2
3 (This one 2
1
1 (There is no 1 (It has no
you with the spray
the spray area
was similar
pressure. This power or
valve? If unsatisfied,
to be more
to the last
has the best
pressure.)
explain.
precise. This
spray valve
design. The
one sprays out
and they
spray angle
too much.)
were both
and pattern
good.)
are good.)
How satisfied are
2 (Streams 1
3
3
2 (It seems 3 (It's good, 1 (Too weak.) 1 (I have to
you with the spray
are skinnier
there may be but I get
get right on
valve's pressure? If and misty,
too much
soaked.)
the plate or
unsatisfied, was it
not as much
pressure. It
scrub to get
too strong, too weak, water.)
misted
the food off.
produced excessive
everywhere.
The
backsplash,
I can get
pressure is
produced misting,
soaked.)
too weak.)
other?
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-8. Boston College McElroy Commons User Satisfaction Survey Responses
D-23
Boston College McElroy Commons
Two users were interviewed at BC McElroy. Both worked the night shift (~3–9 p.m.). Both users were native English
User Information
speakers. The survey was administered verbally and the users provided responses verbally.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
PRSV
Z1
D
C
J
PRSV
3
1
2
3
2
2
1
1
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
Provided By
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
How satisfied are
3
2
2
3
3
3
1 (Too slow, it 1 (It took too
you with the dish
took longer to long to clean
sprayer's ability to
clean the
the plates. I
clean the dishes? If
plates.)
like the
unsatisfied, was it
design, the
too slow, too fast,
always-on
other?
clamp,
because it
gives my
wrist a rest.)
How satisfied are
NA
NA
NA
NA
1 (Too
1 (There is 3
3 (I am able
you with the spray
narrow.)
only one
to direct the
valve's spray
spout.)
spray right
pattern? If
where I want
unsatisfactory, was it
it to go
too wide, too
because it is
focused, nona straight
uniform coverage,
spray
required modified
pattern. I
use pattern, other?
don't like the
fan spray.)
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-8. Boston College McElroy Commons User Satisfaction Survey Responses
D-24
Boston College McElroy Commons
Two users were interviewed at BC McElroy. Both worked the night shift (~3–9 p.m.). Both users were native English
User Information
speakers. The survey was administered verbally and the users provided responses verbally.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
PRSV
Z1
D
C
J
PRSV
3
1
2
3
2
2
1
1
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
Provided By
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
Do you have to
NA
NA
NA
NA
No.
No.
No. I always
No.
adjust the water
use all hot
temperature when
water.
using this spray
valve? If so, did you
make it hotter or
colder? Why?
If you were making
NA
NA
NA
NA
No.
No.
No.
Yes,
the purchasing
because I
decision, would you
liked the
buy this spray valve?
design of the
spray valve.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-8. Boston College McElroy Commons User Satisfaction Survey Responses
D-25
Boston College McElroy Commons
Two users were interviewed at BC McElroy. Both worked the night shift (~3–9 p.m.). Both users were native English
User Information
speakers. The survey was administered verbally and the users provided responses verbally.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
PRSV
Z1
D
C
J
PRSV
3
1
2
3
2
2
1
1
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
Provided By
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
What do you like
It gives off a The spray
The pressure is
I liked that
The
The design I like the spray I like the
about this spray
lot of water spreads over a good.
the spray
pressure
is nice.
pattern, the
design, the
valve?
and has
large area.
pattern
was too
handle with
always-on
good
seemed to
much but
the always-on clamp, and
pressure.
converge on that would
clamp, and
the spray
one spot. I
be the only
how it is
pattern.
do not like
good thing.
small. I like
the fan spray
the design.
models. I like
to be able to
direct the
spray at one
spot. I am
very satisfied
with the
spray pattern
of this spray
valve.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-8. Boston College McElroy Commons User Satisfaction Survey Responses
D-26
Boston College McElroy Commons
Two users were interviewed at BC McElroy. Both worked the night shift (~3–9 p.m.). Both users were native English
User Information
speakers. The survey was administered verbally and the users provided responses verbally.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
PRSV
Z1
D
C
J
PRSV
3
1
2
3
2
2
1
1
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
Provided By
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
What do you dislike Nothing.
It's hard to
I felt like I had to
Nothing.
It was hard
The handle I do not like
There is no
about this spray
clean one
move the spray
to depress
is hard to
the
pressure or
valve?
small area, for valve closer to the
the spray
depress
pressure—
power.
example, the plate to get the
valve. I felt
and
that is the
corner of a
spray streams to
like I got a
―
installed
main thing. It
pan.
converge to a point
workout.
backwards. felt like it took
to be able to clean
‖
longer to
the dishes. If I held
clean the
it too far away the
plates.
sprays crossed. I
felt I had to hold
the spray valve at
exactly the right
angle/height. The
amount of water
that sprayed out
was too little and
caused misting and
backsplash. I felt
that it took longer
to clean larger
items (like bins)
than normal.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-8. Boston College McElroy Commons User Satisfaction Survey Responses
D-27
Boston College McElroy Commons
Two users were interviewed at BC McElroy. Both worked the night shift (~3–9 p.m.). Both users were native English
User Information
speakers. The survey was administered verbally and the users provided responses verbally.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
PRSV
Z1
D
C
J
PRSV
3
1
2
3
2
2
1
1
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
Provided By
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
What type of
Sticky rice, Dried oatmeal NA
Nothing was Dry cereal
Cereal gets Same as
With this
food/residue is
mac and
or cereal. I let
harder to
and dry
stuck, or
usual. It took sprayer,
particularly hard to
cheese.
the dish soak
clean than
sauces are
sauce,
longer to
everything.
clean from plates
if there is
normal.
hard to
depending clean easy
with this spray
residue on it.
Cereal or
remove. The on how
things.
valve?
oatmeal is
same foods long it's
hard to
were difficult been
remove, as I to remove
sitting.
said before. with this
spray valve
than the
others.
Do you ever use
No, just
No, just
No, just hand.
No, just
No.
I do not
I used the
Yes, I
something to hold
manually.
manually.
hand.
use
always-on
always use
the spray valve in
clamps.
clamp once in the alwaysthe on position so it
awhile while
on clamp
is constantly
using this
when I am
spraying (rather than
valve.
using the
manually holding it
spray valve.
on)? If so, what do
you use to hold it on
and how often do
you do this?
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-8. Boston College McElroy Commons User Satisfaction Survey Responses
D-28
Boston College McElroy Commons
Two users were interviewed at BC McElroy. Both worked the night shift (~3–9 p.m.). Both users were native English
User Information
speakers. The survey was administered verbally and the users provided responses verbally.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
PRSV
Z1
D
C
J
PRSV
3
1
2
3
2
2
1
1
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
Provided By
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
What type of dishes Everything. Everything.
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
do you wash daily
(e.g., mostly plates,
pots and pans,
utensils)?
Do you typically
Separately. Separately.
NA
Separately. NA
NA
NA
NA
clean dishes
separately or in a
rack? If different for
different dishes,
please explain.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-8. Boston College McElroy Commons User Satisfaction Survey Responses
D-29
Boston College McElroy Commons
Two users were interviewed at BC McElroy. Both worked the night shift (~3–9 p.m.). Both users were native English
User Information
speakers. The survey was administered verbally and the users provided responses verbally.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
PRSV
Z1
D
C
J
PRSV
3
1
2
3
2
2
1
1
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
Provided By
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
How completely do Pretty clean. All of the food Same as before.
Very
NA
NA
NA
NA
you rinse the
The dishes is cleared off
completely. I
dishes? Is your
are clean
before the
rub my hand
dishwasher effective not
plate goes to
over the
in removing waste
sanitized.
the
plate and
missed by the spray The
dishwasher. I
clean it if I
valve?
dishwasher use my hand
feel
works well. to run over the
something
plate or dish to
left on the
make sure it's
plate. The
smooth before
dishwasher
I send it to the
is good
dishwasher.
unless it's
stuck or
broken and
someone
didn't fix it.
Additional
None.
None.
None.
I wear
None.
None.
If I had to pick If I had to
Comments
gloves
a spray valve pick a spray
because the
to keep, I
valve to
water is hot.
would pick
keep, I
Valve D.
would pick
this one.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-8. Boston College McElroy Commons User Satisfaction Survey Responses
D-30
Boston College McElroy Commons
Two users were interviewed at BC McElroy. Both worked the night shift (~3–9 p.m.). Both users were native English
User Information
speakers. The survey was administered verbally and the users provided responses verbally.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
PRSV
Z1
D
C
J
PRSV
3
1
2
3
2
2
1
1
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
Provided By
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
ERG Notes
This site has two spray
Several users stood around and
Several users stood
Several users stood around
valves set up side-by-side. A discussed which spray valve to
around and discussed
and discussed the spray
data logger was only
keep. They decided to keep Valve which spray valve to
valves to pick which one
installed on one unit, though D on one unit and Valve C for the keep. They said that this they wanted to keep. They
both were metered. At the
other.
spray valve has too much said that this spray valve had
end of week 2, one of the
pressure, caused misting, too little pressure.
baseline spray valves was
and got them wet.
dropped during the pressure
However, they decided to
measurements and the
keep Valve C on one unit
handle broke. It was
and Valve D for the other.
replaced with the next spray
valve to be tested (Valve
D).This premature change
out may have skewed user
satisfaction responses.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-9. Boston College McElroy Commons Facility Operations Survey Responses
Questions
Typical hours of facility operation
General type of food the facility serves for each mealtime
Number of customers served and/or volume of dishes washed (per day, per
week)
Any information about atypical business (i.e., special events)
Whether water is heated by electricity, natural gas, or other means
Whether PRSVs use hot water, cold water, or both
Whether a mixing valve on the faucet feeds the PRSV
How long the spray valves usually last and/or how frequently they are replaced
Any changes in the type of food served
Responses
Monday–Thursday: 7:30 a.m.–12 a.m., Friday–Saturday: 7:30
a.m.–2 a.m., Sunday: 8 a.m.–12 a.m.
Various cuisine for breakfast, lunch, dinner, and late night
snacks
Provided in data tables above
None
Steam
Both
No
6–8 months
None
D-31
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-10. Boston College Stuart Hall Data
Boston College Stuart Hall
PRSV
Z2
I
PRSV
Existing
1st New
Valve
Flow rate category (1 = high, 2 = mid, 3 = low)
N/A
2
Spray pattern
Shower
Fan
Week
Weeks 1–3 Weeks 4–6
Total days used (days)
Total customer count
WATER USED
Total water used (gallons)
Water used per day (gallons per day)
TIME USED
Total time used (minutes)
Time used per day (minutes per day)
DATA MEASURED WEEKLY
Operating static water pressure (psi)
Operating flowing water pressure (psi)
Maximum static water pressure (psi)
Maximum flowing water pressure (psi)
Operating water temperature (°F)
Cold water temperature (°F)
Hot water temperature (°F)
Operating measured flow rate (gpm)
Maximum measured flow rate (gpm)
Cleanability
USER SATISFACTION
Overall user satisfaction (1 = unsatisfied, 2 =
somewhat satisfied, 3 = completely satisfied)
K
2nd New
Valve
1
Fan
Weeks 7–9
20.95
45,862
20.92
45,593
20.87
46,832
M
3rd New
Valve
2
Fan
Weeks 10–
11, 13
20.69
45,694
1051.2
50.2
510.6
24.4
820.2
39.3
401.1
19.4
279.7
13.4
444.5
21.2
680.0
32.6
395.7
19.1
NC
NC
75
39
92.9
58.9
124.7
NC
4.05
N/A
NC
NC
77
71
112.3
59.3
119.5
NC
1.29
22
78
57
78
72
118.3
70.3
123.8
1.18
1.35
17
69
51
71
64
105.1
68.5
119.8
1.10
1.20
20
2
3
3
3
NC – Not collected.
Blue highlight designates the PRSV the user selected to keep.
NOTES:
Boston College Stuart Hall is a residential dining hall on Boston College's law school campus. The dining
hall is open for breakfast, lunch, dinner, and late night snacks. It offers a very diverse cuisine.
After week 12, the data logger malfunctioned and would not allow the weekly data download. A new data
logger was installed to capture a thirteenth week of data to ensure that a full three-week period was
captured.
D-32
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-11. Boston College Stuart Hall User Satisfaction Survey Responses
User Information
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction Score Based
on All Responses
Boston College Stuart Hall
One user was interviewed at BC Stuart Hall. She worked the morning shift (~7 a.m.–3 p.m.) Monday
through Friday. Her first language is Spanish, but she speaks some English. To take the user satisfaction
surveys, she read the survey question translated into Spanish and responded verbally in English.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
Z2
I
K
M
2
3
3
3
D-33
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
How satisfied are you with the spray 1
3
3
valve? If unsatisfied, explain.
How satisfied are you with the spray 3
3
3
valve's pressure? If unsatisfied, was it
too strong, too weak, produced
excessive backsplash, produced
misting, other?
How satisfied are you with the dish
2
3
3
sprayer's ability to clean the dishes?
If unsatisfied, was it too slow, too fast,
other?
How satisfied are you with the spray NA
NA
3
valve's spray pattern? If
unsatisfactory, was it too wide, too
focused, non-uniform coverage,
required modified use pattern, other?
Do you have to adjust the water
NA
NA
No, kept it the same.
temperature when using this spray
valve? If so, did you make it hotter or
colder? Why?
If you were making the purchasing
NA
NA
Yes.
decision, would you buy this spray
valve?
3
3
3
3
No.
Yes.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-11. Boston College Stuart Hall User Satisfaction Survey Responses
User Information
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction Score Based
on All Responses
Boston College Stuart Hall
One user was interviewed at BC Stuart Hall. She worked the morning shift (~7 a.m.–3 p.m.) Monday
through Friday. Her first language is Spanish, but she speaks some English. To take the user satisfaction
surveys, she read the survey question translated into Spanish and responded verbally in English.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
Z2
I
K
M
2
3
3
3
D-34
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
What do you like about this spray
It is strong. I like it. It is
It is okay. It's good. I like The spray is good. There
valve?
good to clean dishes.
it.
is no problem.
What do you dislike about this spray It splashes on me. It is
Nothing. There is no
No problem.
valve?
too high.
problem with it.
What type of food/residue is
Eggs because they are
Eggs because they are
Eggs because they are
particularly hard to clean from plates sticky.
sticky.
sticky.
with this spray valve?
Do you ever use something to hold
No, only use hand to
No, only use hand to
No, only use hand to
the spray valve in the on position so it manually operate the
manually operate the
manually operate the
is constantly spraying (rather than
spray valve.
spray valve.
spray valve.
manually holding it on)? If so, what do
you use to hold it on and how often
do you do this?
What type of dishes do you wash
Everything.
NA
NA
daily (e.g., mostly plates, pots and
pans, utensils)?
Do you typically clean dishes
Hold the plates in a stack NA
NA
separately or in a rack? If different for together and flip through
different dishes, please explain.
them as the water is
spraying. Do not use a
rack.
Everything is okay.
Nothing.
Eggs.
No, only use hand to
manually operate the
spray valve.
NA
NA
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-11. Boston College Stuart Hall User Satisfaction Survey Responses
User Information
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction Score Based
on All Responses
Boston College Stuart Hall
One user was interviewed at BC Stuart Hall. She worked the morning shift (~7 a.m.–3 p.m.) Monday
through Friday. Her first language is Spanish, but she speaks some English. To take the user satisfaction
surveys, she read the survey question translated into Spanish and responded verbally in English.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
Z2
I
K
M
2
3
3
3
D-35
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
How completely do you rinse the
The dishwasher gets the If the food is sticky, I use NA
dishes? Is your dishwasher effective plates very clean.
a brillo pad. Sometimes I
in removing waste missed by the
Sometimes I have to
have to wash dishes two
spray valve?
scrape food off with a foil times in the dishwasher.
rag.
Additional Comments
None.
This one was better than None.
the last one, though it is
too strong and has too
much backsplash.
NA
The straight jet spray is
too strong. I like the
dishguard bumper
because it blocks the
overspray. I like this
spray valve best
because it is easy to use
and not heavy. (NOTE:
She chose to keep this
spray valve.)
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-11. Boston College Stuart Hall User Satisfaction Survey Responses
User Information
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction Score Based
on All Responses
ERG Notes
Boston College Stuart Hall
One user was interviewed at BC Stuart Hall. She worked the morning shift (~7 a.m.–3 p.m.) Monday
through Friday. Her first language is Spanish, but she speaks some English. To take the user satisfaction
surveys, she read the survey question translated into Spanish and responded verbally in English.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
Z2
I
K
M
2
3
3
3
D-36
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
When the meter was
None.
None.
installed, it raised the
height of the spray hose.
The user was short and it
was difficult for her to
reach the hose at its new
height. The hose was
replaced with a longer
hose sometime between
week 3 and 5 so it would
hang at a more optimal
height. This may have
affected her satisfaction
with this valve.
None.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-12. Boston College Stuart Hall Facility Operations Survey Responses
Questions
Typical hours of facility operation
General type of food the facility serves for each mealtime
Number of customers served and/or volume of dishes washed (per day, per
week)
Any information about atypical business (i.e., special events)
D-37
Whether water is heated by electricity, natural gas, or other means
Whether PRSVs use hot water, cold water, or both
Whether a mixing valve on the faucet feeds the PRSV
How long the spray valves usually last and/or how frequently they are replaced
Any changes in the type of food served
Responses
Monday–Friday: 7:15 a.m.–12 a.m., Saturday–Sunday: 9 a.m.–
12 a.m.
Various cuisine for breakfast, lunch, dinner, and late night
snacks
Provided in data tables above
During the baseline monitoring period, the customer throughput
was slightly lower due to two law school ski trips. Customer
throughput may have been slightly lower during the 3rd new
valve monitoring period due to the school’s exam schedule.
Oil
Both
No
Not sure
None
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-13. Buckingham Browne & Nichols School Data
Buckingham Brown & Nichols School
PRSV
Z5
B
PRSV
Existing
1st New
Valve
Flow rate category (1 = high, 2 = mid, 3 = low)
N/A
2
Spray pattern
Shower
Fan
Week
Weeks 1–2 Weeks 3–4
Total days used (days)
11.75
11.94
Total customer count
N/A
N/A
WATER USED
Total water used (gallons)
2409.4
1257.9
Water used per day (gallons per day)
205.1
105.3
TIME USED
Total time used (minutes)
735.0
813.7
Time used per day (minutes per day)
62.6
68.1
DATA MEASURED WEEKLY
Operating static water pressure (psi)
72
67
Operating flowing water pressure (psi)
25
51
Maximum static water pressure (psi)
71
71
Maximum flowing water pressure (psi)
28
55
Operating water temperature (°F)
128.9
136.1
Cold water temperature (°F)
68.1
69.3
Hot water temperature (°F)
141.9
134.4
Operating measured flow rate (gpm)
3.21
1.57
Maximum measured flow rate (gpm)
3.48
1.63
Cleanability
N/A
24
USER SATISFACTION
Overall user satisfaction (1 = unsatisfied, 2 =
2
1
somewhat satisfied, 3 = completely satisfied)
E
2nd New
Valve
3
Fan
Weeks 5–6
11.96
N/A
C
3rd New
Valve
2
Jet
Weeks 7–8
11.93
N/A
1432.7
119.8
1165.8
97.7
927.2
77.6
767.0
64.3
68
52
68
50
109.8
69.0
138.7
1.54
1.62
25
67
55
65
55
116.4
77.0
132.4
1.29
1.30
22
1
3
NC – Not collected.
Blue highlight designates the PRSV the user selected to keep.
NOTES:
BB&N is a private day school that serves breakfast, lunch, and snacks to students throughout the day.
Throughput is consistent. The facility does not count customers because meals are included in students'
tuition, so they are not charged for their meals.
Each two week period captures 12 school days. Weekends and holidays are excluded from this data set.
When installed, Valve C was spraying water out of the ring around the spray nozzle (between the spray
faceplate and the dishguard bumper). During the second week, the leaking Valve C model was replaced
with the Valve C model that was used at Boston College McElroy Commons. It worked with no leaks.
D-38
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-14. Buckingham Browne & Nichols School User Satisfaction Survey Results – Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Tested
During Study
User Information
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction Score
Based on All Responses
D-39
How satisfied are you with the
spray valve? If unsatisfied,
explain.
How satisfied are you with the
spray valve's pressure? If
unsatisfied, was it too strong,
too weak, produced excessive
backsplash, produced misting,
other?
How satisfied are you with the
dish sprayer's ability to clean
the dishes? If unsatisfied, was it
too slow, too fast, other?
Buckingham Browne & Nichols School
One user was interviewed at Buckingham Browne & Nichols School, the sole dish washer and user of the
PRSV. He works from 7 a.m.–2:30 p.m. His primary language is English. The survey was administered to him
verbally in English.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
Z5
B
E
C
2
1
1
3
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
1 (Terrible. Not enough 1
0 (Terrible. Worse
3
pressure.)
pressure than the last one.
Pressure is key to my job.)
1
1 (It's very weak. I want a
0 (Too weak, extremely
3
jet spray. This one is more weak.)
of a showerhead. I want a
direct, powerful spray. I
have to work at cleaning
the dishes.)
1.5 (Not great. Pressure 1 (Too slow.)
0 (Too slow. Dishes are
3
isn't great.)
dirty when they come out
of the dishwasher and I
have to re-rinse a lot with
this spray valve. I feel like I
am using more water
because it takes me
longer. I am not able to do
my job.)
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-14. Buckingham Browne & Nichols School User Satisfaction Survey Results – Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Tested
During Study
User Information
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction Score
Based on All Responses
Buckingham Browne & Nichols School
One user was interviewed at Buckingham Browne & Nichols School, the sole dish washer and user of the
PRSV. He works from 7 a.m.–2:30 p.m. His primary language is English. The survey was administered to him
verbally in English.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
Z5
B
E
C
2
1
1
3
D-40
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
2 (Too wide.)
1 (If there was more
1.5 (The spray pattern
pressure, the spray pattern doesn't matter to me if
would be fine. It is a bit too there is pressure. A direct
wide. It should be a jet
spray would be better, but
stream. It is hard to spray
spray pattern is not that
into the dishwasher to
important. It's hard to get
clean it off.)
stuff that is stuck on and
hard to clean far places.)
Do you have to adjust the water I try not to, but it can get No, I keep it hot anyway
No, I'm not sure.
temperature when using this
too hot and I can get
because it cleans easier
Sometimes I mess with it.
spray valve? If so, did you
burned.
and it's more sanitary.
make it hotter or colder? Why?
If you were making the
No, absolutely not.
No.
No.
purchasing decision, would you
buy this spray valve?
What do you like about this
No.
Nothing.
Nothing. The spray pattern
spray valve?
is fine but the ideal is a
straight spray like a
showerhead with the
massage setting.
How satisfied are you with the
spray valve's spray pattern? If
unsatisfactory, was it too wide,
too focused, non-uniform
coverage, required modified
use pattern, other?
3
No.
Yes.
Everything—it's the best by
far.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-14. Buckingham Browne & Nichols School User Satisfaction Survey Results – Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Tested
During Study
User Information
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction Score
Based on All Responses
What do you dislike about this
spray valve?
D-41
What type of food/residue is
particularly hard to clean from
plates with this spray valve?
Do you ever use something to
hold the spray valve in the on
position so it is constantly
spraying (rather than manually
holding it on)? If so, what do
you use to hold it on and how
often do you do this?
What type of dishes do you
wash daily (e.g. mostly plates,
pots and pans, utensils)?
Buckingham Browne & Nichols School
One user was interviewed at Buckingham Browne & Nichols School, the sole dish washer and user of the
PRSV. He works from 7 a.m.–2:30 p.m. His primary language is English. The survey was administered to him
verbally in English.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
Z5
B
E
C
2
1
1
3
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
NA
The pressure, the spray
I don't like the pressure
pattern because it's too
and the ability to clean. I
wide (but it would be better don't like everything.
if it had better pressure),
the splash back when filling
a bucket. I feel I can't do
my job as well.
Baked on stuff, mac and Mac and cheese, baked on Everything.
cheese, baked ziti, have something, I have to scrub
to scrub and scrub.
plates that are one or two
days old.
No.
No, I don't use the always- Never. It's not smart and
on clamp.
it's a waste of water.
Pots, pans, dishes,
NA
utensils bowls, glasses.
NA
It's too heavy and hard to
squeeze.
Nothing.
Once in awhile I use it to fill
up a bucket.
NA
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-14. Buckingham Browne & Nichols School User Satisfaction Survey Results – Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Tested
During Study
User Information
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction Score
Based on All Responses
D-42
Do you typically clean dishes
separately or in a rack? If
difference for different dishes,
please explain.
How completely do you rinse
the dishes? Is your dishwasher
effective in removing waste
missed by the spray valve?
Buckingham Browne & Nichols School
One user was interviewed at Buckingham Browne & Nichols School, the sole dish washer and user of the
PRSV. He works from 7 a.m.–2:30 p.m. His primary language is English. The survey was administered to him
verbally in English.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
Z5
B
E
C
2
1
1
3
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
Put in rack, spray down NA
NA
and put through
dishwasher.
Yes, sometimes you
NA
have to put them back
through the dishwasher.
The dishwasher is very
hot. I don't have time to
completely rinse the
plates.
NA
NA
NA
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-14. Buckingham Browne & Nichols School User Satisfaction Survey Results – Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Tested
During Study
User Information
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction Score
Based on All Responses
Additional Comments
D-43
ERG Notes
Buckingham Browne & Nichols School
One user was interviewed at Buckingham Browne & Nichols School, the sole dish washer and user of the
PRSV. He works from 7 a.m.–2:30 p.m. His primary language is English. The survey was administered to him
verbally in English.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
Z5
B
E
C
2
1
1
3
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
This spray valve is old
I feel it takes me longer to This spray valve is heavier
and clogged.
clean the dishes with this
and harder to squeeze. I
spray valve. I don't care
like Valve B better than
about or mind overspray
Valve E. I was very
because I will get wet
unhappy with this spray
regardless. I want a narrow valve.
spray and/or a lot more
power. This spray valve
gets heavy. In terms of
design, the spray head is
too narrow and it's hard to
rest it. I have to use this
one more. I use circle
motions continuously to
clean off plates (more than
usual). I have to scrub
more with this spray valve.
It's not the worst but it's not
great and I wouldn't buy it.
None.
None.
None.
I think I used less water
because it was quick to
clean the plates. It was very
easy to clean the dishes.
None.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-15. Buckingham Browne & Nichols School User Satisfaction Survey Responses – Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Tested
Briefly on Last Day of Study
PRSV Category - PRSV
D-44
19
How satisfied
are you?
Buckingham Browne & Nichols School19
How satisfied
How satisfied
How satisfied
are you with
are you with
are you with
the pressure? the ability to
the dish
clean the
sprayer's
dishes?
pattern?
1
1
1
3-A
1
3-J
1
1
1
2
3-H
2
2
2
2
2- I
2
2
2
2
2-G
2
2
2
2
1-K
1
1
1
1.5
1- D
3
3
3
3
Would What do you like/dislike?
you
purcha
se?
No.
No pressure. Nothing is
good.
No.
No pressure. The spray
pattern is okay.
Yes. The pattern is good. The
pressure is okay, but not
great.
Yes. The pattern is okay. The
pressure is okay, not bad.
Yes. It's pretty good. It has decent
pressure. It can clean and
reach very far away. It would
work. I like the distance it
goes.
No.
No pressure. The spray
pattern is okay.
Yes, I like everything. The spray
absolut pattern is good. I like the
ely.
direct spray better but the
shower spray pattern is
good.
The operator at Buckingham Browne & Nichols was particularly interested in the study and wanted to evaluate additional PRSV models. On the
last day of the study, he evaluated several additional models for one to two minutes each and answered the questions provided in this table.
Though this data was collected and is provided here, it was not used in the overall user satisfaction average for each PRSV model because this
operator did not evaluate each model for an entire three-week period.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-16. Buckingham Browne & Nichols School Facility Operations Survey Responses
Questions
Typical hours of facility operation
General type of food the facility serves for each mealtime
Number of customers served and/or volume of dishes washed (per day, per
week)
Any information about atypical business (i.e., special events)
Whether water is heated by electricity, natural gas, or other means
Whether PRSVs use hot water, cold water, or both
Whether a mixing valve on the faucet feeds the PRSV
How long the spray valves usually last and/or how frequently they are replaced
Any changes in the type of food served
Responses
7–9 a.m., 10:30 a.m.–1:15 p.m.
Various cuisine for continental breakfast and lunch
Provided in data tables above
None
Natural Gas
Both
No
Not answered
None
D-45
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-17. Farmers & Fishers Data
PRSV
PRSV
Farmers & Fishers
X
Existing
Flow rate category (1 = high, 2 = mid, 3 = low)
Spray pattern
Week
2
Fan
Weeks 1–3
G
1st New
Valve
2
Fan
Weeks 4–6
F
2nd New
Valve
1
Shower
Weeks 7–9
Total days used (days)
Total customer count
WATER USED
Total water used (gallons)
Water used per day (gallons per day)
TIME USED
Total time used (minutes)
Time used per day (minutes per day)
DATA MEASURED WEEKLY
Operating static water pressure (psi)
Operating flowing water pressure (psi)
Maximum static water pressure (psi)
Maximum flowing water pressure (psi)
Operating water temperature (°F)
Cold water temperature (°F)
Hot water temperature (°F)
Operating measured flow rate (gpm)
Maximum measured flow rate (gpm)
Cleanability
USER SATISFACTION
Overall user satisfaction (1 = unsatisfied, 2 =
somewhat satisfied, 3 = completely satisfied)
20.93
8,021
20.62
9,038
20.83
10,743
J
3rd New
Valve
3
Straight
Weeks 10–
12
20.50
11,424
4167.8
199.2
5821.0
282.3
6492.0
311.6
3458.1
168.7
3818.6
182.5
4215.1
204.4
4189.3
201.1
4144.3
202.2
62
55
NC
NC
126.1
49.7
131.4
1.17
NC
N/A
62
55
62
56
129.2
74.7
140.9
1.41
1.39
23
NC
NC
NC
NC
127.0
74.6
128.0
1.54
1.55
21
63
61
63
60
122.2
86.7
123.8
0.79
0.80
21
2
3
3
1
NC – Not collected.
Blue highlight designates the PRSV the user selected to keep.
NOTES:
Farmers & Fishers is a restaurant located in downtown Washington, D.C., that serves breakfast, lunch,
and dinner seven days a week. It is a Green Living Consulting Certified Green Business, serving
American fare sourced from sustainable agriculture.
The last installed valve, originally Valve H, was experiencing leaking at the handle. The valve was
removed after one week of use and was replaced with Valve J, which was kept in for the final two weeks
of monitoring. Because of this, Valve J was monitored for only two weeks. A third week has been proxied
in from the averaged results of weeks 11 and 12 for the purposes of comparing between three-week time
periods.
D-46
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-18. Farmers & Fishers User Satisfaction Survey Responses
User Information
Farmers & Fishers
Two users at Farmers & Fishers were interviewed: one for the baseline monitoring and the 3rd new
valve, the other for the 1st and 2nd new valves. Both are native Spanish speakers. The survey was
administered to them verbally in Spanish.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
X
G
F
J
2
3
3
1
D-47
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction Score Based on All
Responses
Responses Provided By
User 1
User 2
User 2
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
How satisfied are you with the spray valve? 1
3
2
If unsatisfied, explain.
How satisfied are you with the spray valve's 1 (The valve sprays too 3
3
pressure? If unsatisfied, was it too strong,
slowly; the water
too weak, produced excessive backsplash, pressure is too low.)
produced misting, other?
How satisfied are you with the dish
3
3
3
sprayer's ability to clean the dishes? If
unsatisfied, was it too slow, too fast, other?
How satisfied are you with the spray valve's 3
3
2
spray pattern? If unsatisfactory, was it too
wide, too focused, non-uniform coverage,
required modified use pattern, other?
Do you have to adjust the water
No.
Yes, sometimes the
No.
temperature when using this spray valve? If
water is very cold and I
so, did you make it hotter or colder? Why?
have to adjust the
temperature to make it
hotter.
If you were making the purchasing decision, No.
Yes.
Yes.
would you buy this spray valve?
User 1
1
2 (A little weak.)
2
3
Sometimes.
No.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-18. Farmers & Fishers User Satisfaction Survey Responses
User Information
Farmers & Fishers
Two users at Farmers & Fishers were interviewed: one for the baseline monitoring and the 3rd new
valve, the other for the 1st and 2nd new valves. Both are native Spanish speakers. The survey was
administered to them verbally in Spanish.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
X
G
F
J
2
3
3
1
D-48
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction Score Based on All
Responses
Responses Provided By
User 1
User 2
User 2
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
What do you like about this spray valve?
Water is sufficiently hot Everything.
I like the force of the
when it comes out of
water.
the spray valve and
cleans the plates pretty
well.
What do you dislike about this spray valve? There is not enough
Nothing.
Nothing.
pressure.
What type of food/residue is particularly
hard to clean from plates with this spray
valve?
Do you ever use something to hold the
spray valve in the on position so it is
constantly spraying (rather than manually
holding it on)? If so, what do you use to hold
it on and how often do you do this?
What type of dishes do you wash daily (e.g.
mostly plates, pots and pans, utensils)?
Do you typically clean dishes separately or
in a rack? If difference for different dishes,
please explain.
User 1
I like that the trigger
can be locked into
place.
It is difficult to fully
engage and hold down
the handle.
Cheese and chocolate.
Desserts.
Eggs.
Eggs.
No; manually hold the
spray valve.
I only wash dishes by
hand.
I only wash dishes by
hand.
NA
A little bit of everything. NA
NA
NA
I wash dishes both
separately and all
together in the rack.
NA
NA
NA
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-18. Farmers & Fishers User Satisfaction Survey Responses
User Information
Farmers & Fishers
Two users at Farmers & Fishers were interviewed: one for the baseline monitoring and the 3rd new
valve, the other for the 1st and 2nd new valves. Both are native Spanish speakers. The survey was
administered to them verbally in Spanish.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
X
G
F
J
2
3
3
1
D-49
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction Score Based on All
Responses
Responses Provided By
User 1
User 2
User 2
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
How completely do you rinse the dishes? Is The plates have to be
NA
NA
your dishwasher effective in removing waste well-rinsed before they
missed by the spray valve?
go into the dishwasher.
Additional Comments
None.
None.
None.
ERG Notes
This spray valve was
leaking slightly from the
face of the valve.
User 1
NA
None.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-19. Farmers & Fishers Facility Operations Survey Responses
Questions
Typical hours of facility operation
General type of food the facility serves for each mealtime
D-50
Number of customers served and/or volume of dishes washed (per day, per
week)
Any information about atypical business (i.e., special events)
Whether water is heated by electricity, natural gas, or other means
Whether PRSVs use hot water, cold water, or both
Whether a mixing valve on the faucet feeds the PRSV
How long the spray valves usually last and/or how frequently they are replaced
Any changes in the type of food served
Responses
Monday–Thursday: 11:30 a.m.–10 p.m., Friday–Saturday:
11:30 a.m.–11 p.m., Sunday: 10 a.m.–10 p.m. Facility typically
opens three hours prior to beginning of service and stays open
an hour after service.
American fare sourced from sustainable agriculture for lunch
and dinner
Provided in data tables above
It closes occasionally for private events.
Electric
Both
No
Installed when the restaurant opened in June 2009. Not yet
replaced.
None
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-20. Founding Farmers Data
PRSV
PRSV
Founding Farmers
K
Existing
Flow rate category (1 = high, 2 = mid, 3 = low)
Spray pattern
Week
1
Fan
Weeks 1–3
F
1st New
Valve
1
Shower
Weeks 4–6
E
2nd New
Valve
3
Fan
Weeks 7–9
Total days used (days)
Total customer count
WATER USED
Total water used (gallons)
Water used per day (gallons per day)
TIME USED
Total time used (minutes)
Time used per day (minutes per day)
DATA MEASURED WEEKLY
Operating static water pressure (psi)
Operating flowing water pressure (psi)
Maximum static water pressure (psi)
Maximum flowing water pressure (psi)
Operating water temperature (°F)
Cold water temperature (°F)
Hot water temperature (°F)
Operating measured flow rate (gpm)
Maximum measured flow rate (gpm)
Cleanability
USER SATISFACTION
Overall user satisfaction (1 = unsatisfied, 2 =
somewhat satisfied, 3 = completely satisfied)
17.78
17,301
17.63
16,653
17.85
18,384
L
3rd New
Valve
2
Fan
Weeks 10–
12
17.93
17,901
3520.7
198.0
3383.1
191.9
4898.8
274.5
4200.3
234.3
3195.7
179.7
2771.7
157.2
3157.5
176.9
4030.8
224.9
58
42
NC
NC
119.2
93.1
119.8
1.10
1.21
17
NC
NC
NC
NC
106.1
99.3
99.4
1.19
1.19
21
58
44
NC
NC
112.8
98.0
122.0
1.62
1.72
25
59
51
61
55
109.8
93.9
114.0
1.07
1.09
23
3
3
3
2
NC – Not collected.
Orange highlight indicates that the PRSV malfunctioned during study.
NOTES:
Founding Farmers is a restaurant located in downtown Washington, D.C., that serves breakfast, lunch,
and dinner seven days a week. It is a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED®) Gold
certified restaurant and a Certified Green Restaurant, serving American fare sourced from sustainable
agriculture.
Shut-off valves at the facility did not work so no pressure readings could be taken for most of the study.
A leak occurred in Valve E in the final week of monitoring. This leak has been accounted for in the data
analysis. ERG determined the average flow rate of the leak and subtracted it from the affected data set.
D-51
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
The dishguard bumper fell off of Valve L during the monitoring period. The valve could still perform and
the entire data set was collected.
D-52
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-21. Founding Farmers User Satisfaction Survey Responses
User Information
Founding Farmers
Three different users were interviewed at Founding Farmers. All are native Spanish speakers. The
survey was administered to them verbally in Spanish.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
K
F
E
L
3
3
3
2
D-53
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction Score Based on All
Responses
Responses Provided By
User 1
User 2
User 3
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
How satisfied are you with the spray valve? 3
3
3
If unsatisfied, explain.
How satisfied are you with the spray valve's 3
3
3
pressure? If unsatisfied, was it too strong,
too weak, produced excessive backsplash,
produced misting, other?
How satisfied are you with the dish
3
2 (The water pressure 3
sprayer's ability to clean the dishes? If
was a bit low.)
unsatisfied, was it too slow, too fast, other?
How satisfied are you with the spray valve's 3
3 (I prefer the spray
3
spray pattern? If unsatisfactory, was it too
formation on this spray
wide, too focused, non-uniform coverage,
valve to the previous
required modified use pattern, other?
one.)
Do you have to adjust the water
No, I don't have to
No.
No.
temperature when using this spray valve? If change the water
so, did you make it hotter or colder? Why?
temperature. I just keep
it at the normal
temperature.
If you were making the purchasing decision, Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
would you buy this spray valve?
User 3
2
2
3
2
No.
Yes.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-21. Founding Farmers User Satisfaction Survey Responses
User Information
Founding Farmers
Three different users were interviewed at Founding Farmers. All are native Spanish speakers. The
survey was administered to them verbally in Spanish.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
K
F
E
L
3
3
3
2
D-54
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction Score Based on All
Responses
Responses Provided By
User 1
User 2
User 3
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
What do you like about this spray valve?
It works well even
I like the grip of the
Works well.
though we are working spray valve. The
almost the entire day.
handle is oriented
differently than the
previous spray valve
and is easier to use
and more comfortable.
What do you dislike about this spray valve? No, it's good.
None.
None.
What type of food/residue is particularly
It's all about the same. It doesn't make a
No.
hard to clean from plates with this spray
In order to clean the
difference. What really
valve?
plate well, you simply
matters is how long the
have to maintain the
food has been sitting
right pressure.
on the dishes.
Do you ever use something to hold the
This latch is only used No.
No.
spray valve in the on position so it is
to maintain the spray
constantly spraying (rather than manually
valve open. But we
holding it on)? If so, what do you use to hold can't do that because in
it on and how often do you do this?
this case we're only
allowed to do it by end.
User 3
Comfortable handle.
Nothing.
Eggs.
No.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-21. Founding Farmers User Satisfaction Survey Responses
User Information
Founding Farmers
Three different users were interviewed at Founding Farmers. All are native Spanish speakers. The
survey was administered to them verbally in Spanish.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
K
F
E
L
3
3
3
2
D-55
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction Score Based on All
Responses
Responses Provided By
User 1
User 2
User 3
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
What type of dishes do you wash daily (e.g. Mostly plates and prep NA
NA
mostly plates, pots and pans, utensils)?
dishware (mixing
bowls, large plastic
containers, etc.).
Silverware gets
washed elsewhere.
Do you typically clean dishes separately or We use racks.
NA
NA
in a rack? If difference for different dishes,
please explain.
How completely do you rinse the dishes? Is I wash them pretty
NA
NA
your dishwasher effective in removing waste completely. The water
missed by the spray valve?
in the dishwasher has
to be changed often to
prevent food residue
buildup.
Additional Comments
User 3
NA
NA
NA
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-21. Founding Farmers User Satisfaction Survey Responses
User Information
Founding Farmers
Three different users were interviewed at Founding Farmers. All are native Spanish speakers. The
survey was administered to them verbally in Spanish.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
K
F
E
L
3
3
3
2
D-56
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction Score Based on All
Responses
Responses Provided By
User 1
User 2
User 3
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
ERG Notes
This spray valve broke
during the last week of
its monitoring and had
a significant leak. A
new spray valve (same
model) was brought in
to conduct the user
satisfaction survey, but
it was done at the end
of the study rather than
after week 9. The late
survey may have
impacted the user
satisfaction results.
User 3
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-22. Founding Farmers Facility Operations Survey Responses
Questions
Typical hours of facility operation
D-57
General type of food the facility serves for each
mealtime
Number of customers served and/or volume of dishes
washed (per day, per week)
Any information about atypical business (i.e., special
events)
Whether water is heated by electricity, natural gas, or
other means
Whether PRSVs use hot water, cold water, or both
Whether a mixing valve on the faucet feeds the PRSV
How long the spray valves usually last and/or how
frequently they are replaced
Any changes in the type of food served
Responses
Monday: 8 a.m.–10 p.m., Tuesday–Thursday: 8 a.m.-11 p.m., Friday: 8 a.m.–12 p.m.,
Saturday: 9 a.m.–12 a.m., Sunday: 9 a.m.–10 p.m. Facility typically opens three hours
prior to service and stays open an hour after service.
American fare sourced from sustainable agriculture for breakfast, lunch, and dinner
Provided in data tables above
It closes occasionally for private events.
Natural Gas
Both
No
Installed when the restaurant opened in September 2008. Not yet replaced.
None
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-23. Jimmy’s Steer House Data
Jimmy's Steer House
PRSV
Z3
D
PRSV
Existing
1st New
Valve
Flow rate category (1 = high, 2 = mid, 3 =
N/A
1
low)
Spray pattern
Shower
Shower
Week
Weeks 1–3 Weeks 4–6
Total days used (days)
Total customer count
WATER USED
Total water used (gallons)
Water used per day (gallons per day)
TIME USED
Total time used (minutes)
Time used per day (minutes per day)
DATA MEASURED WEEKLY
Operating static water pressure (psi)
Operating flowing water pressure (psi)
Maximum static water pressure (psi)
Maximum flowing water pressure (psi)
Operating water temperature (°F)
Cold water temperature (°F)
Hot water temperature (°F)
Operating measured flow rate (gpm)
Maximum measured flow rate (gpm)
Cleanability
USER SATISFACTION
User 1’s overall user satisfaction (1 =
unsatisfied, 2 = somewhat satisfied, 3 =
completely satisfied)
User 2’s overall user satisfaction (1 =
unsatisfied, 2 = somewhat satisfied, 3 =
completely satisfied)
A
2nd New
Valve
3
I
3rd New
Valve
2
Fan
Weeks 7–9
20.93
16,136
20.76
16,584
20.90
15,779
Fan
Weeks 10–
12
20.94
16,065
5253.6
251.0
2489.2
119.9
1210.0
57.9
2515.2
120.1
2036.0
97.3
1953.1
94.1
1866.3
89.3
2353.6
112.4
67
39
67
43
74.8
52.4
154.4
2.62
2.66
N/A
68
53
69
55
82.6
58.7
149.3
1.35
1.40
21
62
57
62
56
86.6
61.4
135.4
0.65
0.67
21
65
55
64
55
83.7
66.7
136.1
1.14
1.15
22
3
3
1
2
3
3
NC
3
NC – Not collected.
Blue highlight designates the PRSV the users selected to keep.
NOTES:
Jimmy's Steer House is a steak house in the Boston area that is open for lunch and dinner seven days a
week.
A water ban was in effect in Boston during the second new valve's monitoring period. Residents in the
area were not supposed to drink any of the water without boiling it during this time.
D-58
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-24. Jimmy’s Steer House User Satisfaction Survey Responses
User Information
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses Provided
By
Jimmy's Steer House
Two users were interviewed at Jimmy's Steer House. Both worked the morning/afternoon shift. User 1 speaks Haitian
Creole as a first language, French as a second, and some English as a third. User 2 speaks Portuguese. The study
was verbally conducted with User 1 in French. User 2 took the survey in written form in Portuguese.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
Z3
D
A
I
3
3
3
3
1
NA
2
3
D-59
How satisfied are you
2
with the spray valve? If
unsatisfied, explain.
How satisfied are you
3
with the spray valve's
pressure? If unsatisfied,
was it too strong, too
weak, produced
excessive backsplash,
produced misting, other?
How satisfied are you
3
with the dish sprayer's
ability to clean the
dishes? If unsatisfied,
was it too slow, too fast,
other?
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
3
3
3
1
NA
User 1
User 2
2
3
3
3
3
1
NA
2
3
3
3 (It has
good
pressure.)
3
1
NA
1 (Slow.)
3
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-24. Jimmy’s Steer House User Satisfaction Survey Responses
User Information
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses Provided
By
D-60
How satisfied are you
with the spray valve's
spray pattern? If
unsatisfactory, was it too
wide, too focused, nonuniform coverage,
required modified use
pattern, other?
Do you have to adjust
the water temperature
when using this spray
valve? If so, did you
make it hotter or colder?
Why?
If you were making the
purchasing decision,
would you buy this spray
valve?
What do you like about
this spray valve?
Jimmy's Steer House
Two users were interviewed at Jimmy's Steer House. Both worked the morning/afternoon shift. User 1 speaks Haitian
Creole as a first language, French as a second, and some English as a third. User 2 speaks Portuguese. The study
was verbally conducted with User 1 in French. User 2 took the survey in written form in Portuguese.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
Z3
D
A
I
3
3
3
3
1
NA
2
3
User 1
2
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
3
3 (It's good.) 3
2
NA
User 1
User 2
2
3
It works
better with
hot water. I
don't use
cold as
much.
NA
No.
Same as
before.
No.
No.
NA
No.
No.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
No.
NA
Maybe, it's
okay.
Yes.
It sprays
well.
Okay, no
problem.
Good
pressure.
Everything.
No good, no
pressure.
NA
It's
good/okay.
It's good.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-24. Jimmy’s Steer House User Satisfaction Survey Responses
User Information
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses Provided
By
Jimmy's Steer House
Two users were interviewed at Jimmy's Steer House. Both worked the morning/afternoon shift. User 1 speaks Haitian
Creole as a first language, French as a second, and some English as a third. User 2 speaks Portuguese. The study
was verbally conducted with User 1 in French. User 2 took the survey in written form in Portuguese.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
Z3
D
A
I
3
3
3
3
1
NA
2
3
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
D-61
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
What do you dislike
Nothing, it's I like it.
Nothing, it's Nothing.
No pressure. NA
about this spray valve?
okay.
good.
What type of
Everything is Cheese.
Everything is NA
Nothing.
NA
food/residue is
fine when the
cleaned off,
particularly hard to clean water is hot.
nothing.
from plates with this
spray valve?
Do you ever use
No, but
Yes.
No.
No, just my
No.
NA
something to hold the
others keep it
hands.
spray valve in the on
on all the
position so it is
time. The
constantly spraying
handle is
(rather than manually
broken.
holding it on)? If so, what
do you use to hold it on
and how often do you do
this?
What type of dishes do
Pots, plates, Yes.
NA
NA
NA
NA
you wash daily (e.g.
cups, pans.
mostly plates, pots and
pans, utensils)?
User 1
User 2
Nothing.
Nothing.
Cheese.
Nothing.
No.
No.
NA
NA
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-24. Jimmy’s Steer House User Satisfaction Survey Responses
User Information
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses Provided
By
Jimmy's Steer House
Two users were interviewed at Jimmy's Steer House. Both worked the morning/afternoon shift. User 1 speaks Haitian
Creole as a first language, French as a second, and some English as a third. User 2 speaks Portuguese. The study
was verbally conducted with User 1 in French. User 2 took the survey in written form in Portuguese.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
Z3
D
A
I
3
3
3
3
1
NA
2
3
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
D-62
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
Do you typically clean
I use a rack No.
NA
NA
NA
NA
dishes separately or in a for the
rack? If difference for
machine. I
different dishes, please
rinse the
explain.
dishes then
put them in a
rack for the
machine. I
wash cups in
a rack.
How completely do you The
Yes.
NA
NA
NA
NA
rinse the dishes? Is your dishwasher
dishwasher effective in
rinses the
removing waste missed dishes pretty
by the spray valve?
well; it is very
hot. Nothing
is left on the
plates.
Additional Comments
None.
None.
None.
None.
None.
None.
ERG Notes
None.
None.
None.
None.
None.
None.
User 1
User 2
NA
NA
NA
NA
None.
None.
None.
None.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-25. Jimmy’s Steer House Facility Operations Survey Responses
Questions
Typical hours of facility operation
General type of food the facility serves for each mealtime
Number of customers served and/or volume of dishes washed (per day, per
week)
Any information about atypical business (i.e., special events)
D-63
Whether water is heated by electricity, natural gas, or other means
Whether PRSVs use hot water, cold water, or both
Whether a mixing valve on the faucet feeds the PRSV
How long the spray valves usually last and/or how frequently they are replaced
Any changes in the type of food served
Responses
Monday–Thursday: 11:15 a.m.–9:30 p.m., Friday–Saturday:
11:15 a.m.–10 p.m., Sunday: 12 p.m.–9 p.m.
Steakhouse cuisine for lunch and dinner
Provided in data tables above
During the baseline monitoring period, the restaurant was slow
during the Easter holiday; the customer count was probably
down 500 from normal. A water ban was in effect in Boston
during the second new valve monitoring period.
Natural Gas
Both
No
3–6 months
None
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-26. Mario’s Italian Restaurant Data
Mario's Italian Restaurant
PRSV
Z4
G
PRSV
Existing
1st New
Valve
Flow rate category (1 = high, 2 = mid, 3 = low)
1
2
Spray pattern
Shower
Fan
Week
Weeks 1–3 Weeks 4–6
Total days used (days)
Total customer count
WATER USED
Total water used (gallons)
Water used per day (gallons per day)
TIME USED
Total time used (minutes)
Time used per day (minutes per day)
DATA MEASURED WEEKLY
Operating static water pressure (psi)
Operating flowing water pressure (psi)
Maximum static water pressure (psi)
Maximum flowing water pressure (psi)
Operating water temperature (°F)
Cold water temperature (°F)
Hot water temperature (°F)
Operating measured flow rate (gpm)
Maximum measured flow rate (gpm)
Cleanability
USER SATISFACTION
User 1’s overall user satisfaction (1 =
unsatisfied, 2 = somewhat satisfied, 3 =
completely satisfied)
User 2’s overall user satisfaction (1 =
unsatisfied, 2 = somewhat satisfied, 3 =
completely satisfied)
F
2nd New
Valve
1
Shower
Weeks 7–9
20.89
4,615
20.89
4,789
20.97
5,263
J
4th New
Valve
3
Jet
Weeks 12–
14
20.79
4,915
3082.5
147.5
1497.5
71.7
1755.3
83.7
685.7
33.0
762.3
36.5
904.3
43.3
1000.5
47.7
1033.1
49.7
NC
NC
91
48
84.6
49.2
107.3
4.31
4.37
NA
91
73
91
79
85.9
56.6
106.0
1.75
1.78
23
82
68
82
71
76.1
60.2
102.8
1.88
1.90
21
88
83
88
84
69.0
66.3
103.3
0.78
0.77
21
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
2
NC – Not collected.
Blue highlight designates the PRSV the users selected to keep.
NOTES:
Mario's Italian Restaurant is an Italian restaurant in the Boston area that serves lunch and dinner seven
days a week.
A water ban was in effect in Boston during the second new valve's monitoring period. Residents in the
area were not supposed to drink any of the water without boiling it during this time.
D-64
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Valve N was installed as the third valve, but during the second week's visit, water was spraying out of the
ring around the spray nozzle (between the spray face plate and the dishguard bumper). During the
second week, Valve J was installed and a new three-week test period was initiated.
D-65
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-27. Mario’s Italian Restaurant User Satisfaction Survey Responses
User Information
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses Provided
By
Mario's Italian Restaurant
Two users were interviewed at Mario's Italian Restaurant. Both worked the morning/afternoon shift. Both were native
Spanish speakers. User 1 also spoke fairly good English. The users took the survey in Spanish in written form, and
User 1 would sometimes provide verbal feedback on the spray valves in addition to the written survey.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
Z4
G
F
J
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
D-66
How satisfied are you
3
with the spray valve? If
unsatisfied, explain.
How satisfied are you
3
with the spray valve's
pressure? If unsatisfied,
was it too strong, too
weak, produced
excessive backsplash,
produced misting, other?
How satisfied are you
3
with the dish sprayer's
ability to clean the
dishes? If unsatisfied,
was it too slow, too fast,
other?
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
3
3
3
3
3
User 1
User 2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-27. Mario’s Italian Restaurant User Satisfaction Survey Responses
User Information
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses Provided
By
D-67
How satisfied are you
with the spray valve's
spray pattern? If
unsatisfactory, was it too
wide, too focused, nonuniform coverage,
required modified use
pattern, other?
Do you have to adjust
the water temperature
when using this spray
valve? If so, did you
make it hotter or colder?
Why?
If you were making the
purchasing decision,
would you buy this spray
valve?
What do you like about
this spray valve?
Mario's Italian Restaurant
Two users were interviewed at Mario's Italian Restaurant. Both worked the morning/afternoon shift. Both were native
Spanish speakers. User 1 also spoke fairly good English. The users took the survey in Spanish in written form, and
User 1 would sometimes provide verbal feedback on the spray valves in addition to the written survey.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
Z4
G
F
J
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
User 1
3
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
3
3
3
3
3
User 1
User 2
2
2
No.
No.
No.
NA
No.
No.
No.
No.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
No.
No.
Everything.
Everything.
Everything.
NA
NA
NA
Everything is Everything.
okay.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-27. Mario’s Italian Restaurant User Satisfaction Survey Responses
User Information
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses Provided
By
D-68
What do you dislike
about this spray valve?
What type of
food/residue is
particularly hard to clean
from plates with this
spray valve?
Do you ever use
something to hold the
spray valve in the on
position so it is
constantly spraying
(rather than manually
holding it on)? If so, what
do you use to hold it on
and how often do you do
this?
What type of dishes do
you wash daily (e.g.
mostly plates, pots and
pans, utensils)?
Mario's Italian Restaurant
Two users were interviewed at Mario's Italian Restaurant. Both worked the morning/afternoon shift. Both were native
Spanish speakers. User 1 also spoke fairly good English. The users took the survey in Spanish in written form, and
User 1 would sometimes provide verbal feedback on the spray valves in addition to the written survey.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
Z4
G
F
J
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
It's okay.
Nothing.
Nothing.
Nothing.
Nothing.
Nothing.
User 1
User 2
Melted
cheese, dry
sauce.
Nothing.
Cheese.
Cheese.
None.
Cheese.
It is too
weak.
Cheese.
It is very
weak.
Cheese.
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
Plates.
Plates.
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-27. Mario’s Italian Restaurant User Satisfaction Survey Responses
User Information
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses Provided
By
Mario's Italian Restaurant
Two users were interviewed at Mario's Italian Restaurant. Both worked the morning/afternoon shift. Both were native
Spanish speakers. User 1 also spoke fairly good English. The users took the survey in Spanish in written form, and
User 1 would sometimes provide verbal feedback on the spray valves in addition to the written survey.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
Z4
G
F
J
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
User 1
D-69
Do you typically clean
Yes.
dishes separately or in a
rack? If difference for
different dishes, please
explain.
How completely do you Yes.
rinse the dishes? Is your
dishwasher effective in
removing waste missed
by the spray valve?
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
In a rack.
NA
NA
NA
NA
Yes.
NA
NA
NA
NA
User 1
User 2
NA
NA
NA
NA
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-27. Mario’s Italian Restaurant User Satisfaction Survey Responses
User Information
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction
Score Based on All
Responses
Responses Provided
By
Mario's Italian Restaurant
Two users were interviewed at Mario's Italian Restaurant. Both worked the morning/afternoon shift. Both were native
Spanish speakers. User 1 also spoke fairly good English. The users took the survey in Spanish in written form, and
User 1 would sometimes provide verbal feedback on the spray valves in addition to the written survey.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
Z4
G
F
J
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
User 1
None.
ERG Notes
None.
D-70
Additional Comments
User 2
User 1
User 2
User 1
User 2
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
None.
There is a lot None.
I like the
None.
of water in
pressure. I
the outer
can take all
spray
of the food
streams and
off of the
only a little
plate very
water in the
nicely.
middle of the
stream. It is
not uniform.
The inside
spray is
misty while
the outside is
forceful/straig
ht.
None.
None.
None.
None.
None.
User 1
User 2
None.
None.
None.
None.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-28. Mario’s Italian Restaurant Facility Operations Survey Responses
Questions
Typical hours of facility operation
General type of food the facility serves for each mealtime
Number of customers served and/or volume of dishes washed (per day, per
week)
Any information about atypical business (i.e., special events)
D-71
Whether water is heated by electricity, natural gas, or other means
Whether PRSVs use hot water, cold water, or both
Whether a mixing valve on the faucet feeds the PRSV
How long the spray valves usually last and/or how frequently they are replaced
Any changes in the type of food served
Responses
Monday–Thursday: 11:15 a.m.–9:30 p.m., Friday–Saturday:
11:15 a.m.–10 p.m., Sunday: 12 p.m.–9 p.m.
Italian cuisine for lunch and dinner
Provided in data tables above
During the first new valve monitoring period, the restaurant
closed one day for Easter. A water ban was in effect in Boston
during the second new valve monitoring period, and the
restaurant was forced to close for one night, losing 200
customers.
Natural Gas
Both
No
Replaced the hose twice in seven years and the PRSV once in
seven years
None
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-29. The Fireplace Restaurant Data
The Fireplace Restaurant
PRSV
D
K
PRSV
Existing
1st New
Valve
Flow rate category (1 = high, 2 = mid, 3 = low)
1
1
Spray pattern
Shower
Fan
Week
Weeks 1–3 Weeks 4–6
Total days used (days)
Total customer count
WATER USED
Total water used (gallons)
Water used per day (gallons per day)
TIME USED
Total time used (minutes)
Time used per day (minutes per day)
DATA MEASURED WEEKLY
Operating static water pressure (psi)
Operating flowing water pressure (psi)
Maximum static water pressure (psi)
Maximum flowing water pressure (psi)
Operating water temperature (°F)
Cold water temperature (°F)
Hot water temperature (°F)
Operating measured flow rate (gpm)
Maximum measured flow rate (gpm)
Cleanability
USER SATISFACTION
Overall user satisfaction (1 = unsatisfied, 2 =
somewhat satisfied, 3 = completely satisfied)
H
2nd New
Valve
3
Jet
Weeks 7–9
20.88
3,700
20.95
3,550
20.90
3,692
B
3rd New
Valve
2
Fan
Weeks 10–
12
20.94
3,698
1676.7
80.3
1733.2
82.7
1380.8
66.1
1726.5
82.5
1580.2
75.7
1579.7
75.4
1693.8
81.0
1217.8
58.2
73
59
76
63
113.4
51.6
119.2
1.04
1.19
21
71
52
73
61
123.2
61.9
122.6
1.09
1.33
17
68
54
73
64
113.0
62.0
199.3
0.86
0.96
20
66
43
71
55
121.9
66.8
126.1
1.46
1.74
24
3
3
1
3
NC – Not collected.
Blue highlight designates the PRSV the user selected to keep.
Orange highlight indicates that the PRSV malfunctioned during study.
NOTES:
The Fireplace Restaurant is a Certified Green Restaurant that serves American cuisine and is open for
lunch and dinner Monday–Friday and for brunch and dinner on Saturday and Sunday.
Valve H began leaking slightly only when the PRSV was depressed sometime during the last week of the
data collection for this valve. Water was squirting from the point where the spray handle meets the
depression point that allows the valve to open. The user had rigged a plastic glove onto the PRSV to
prevent it from spraying him. The leak was not apparent in the data so it was not adjusted.
D-72
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-30. The Fireplace Restaurant User Satisfaction Survey Responses
User Information
The Fireplace Restaurant
One user was interviewed at The Fireplace Restaurant. He works the lunch shift. He is a native
Spanish speaker and does not speak any English. He took the surveys in written form in Spanish.
On the last day, a native Spanish speaker interviewed the user in Spanish on his thoughts on the
PRSVs and asked him which valve he wanted to keep.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
D
K
H
B
3
3
1
3
D-73
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction Score Based on All
Responses
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
How satisfied are you with the spray valve? 3
3
1
If unsatisfied, explain.
How satisfied are you with the spray valve's 3
3
3
pressure? If unsatisfied, was it too strong,
too weak, produced excessive backsplash,
produced misting, other?
How satisfied are you with the dish
3
3
3
sprayer's ability to clean the dishes? If
unsatisfied, was it too slow, too fast, other?
How satisfied are you with the spray valve's
3
3
spray pattern? If unsatisfactory, was it too
wide, too focused, non-uniform coverage,
required modified use pattern, other?
Do you have to adjust the water
No.
Yes, to cool something. Yes, to cool something.
temperature when using this spray valve? If
so, did you make it hotter or colder? Why?
If you were making the purchasing decision, Yes.
No.
No.
would you buy this spray valve?
What do you like about this spray valve?
It's strong.
The way it is.
It's strong.
What do you dislike about this spray valve? Nothing.
It's strong.
The spray is very
straight.
3
3
3
3
Just to cool something.
NA
It is good.
It is good.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-30. The Fireplace Restaurant User Satisfaction Survey Responses
User Information
The Fireplace Restaurant
One user was interviewed at The Fireplace Restaurant. He works the lunch shift. He is a native
Spanish speaker and does not speak any English. He took the surveys in written form in Spanish.
On the last day, a native Spanish speaker interviewed the user in Spanish on his thoughts on the
PRSVs and asked him which valve he wanted to keep.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
D
K
H
B
3
3
1
3
D-74
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction Score Based on All
Responses
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
What type of food/residue is particularly
Eggs.
Eggs.
Eggs with cheese.
hard to clean from plates with this spray
valve?
Do you ever use something to hold the
NA
No.
Nothing.
spray valve in the on position so it is
constantly spraying (rather than manually
holding it on)? If so, what do you use to hold
it on and how often do you do this?
What type of dishes do you wash daily (e.g. Plates.
NA
NA
mostly plates, pots and pans, utensils)?
Do you typically clean dishes separately or Yes.
NA
NA
in a rack? If difference for different dishes,
please explain.
How completely do you rinse the dishes? Is Yes.
NA
NA
your dishwasher effective in removing waste
missed by the spray valve?
Additional Comments
This spray valve is
This spray valve is
This spray valve is my
okay. I felt the same
okay. I felt the same
least favorite. It has a
about Valve D and
about Valve D and
small spray pattern. It
Valve K.
Valve K.
can knock glasses out
of my hand.
Eggs with cheese.
No.
NA
NA
NA
I'd like to keep this
spray valve. I like it
because it has the best
spray with a wide
breadth. It has good
pressure. It was my
favorite by far.
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-30. The Fireplace Restaurant User Satisfaction Survey Responses
User Information
The Fireplace Restaurant
One user was interviewed at The Fireplace Restaurant. He works the lunch shift. He is a native
Spanish speaker and does not speak any English. He took the surveys in written form in Spanish.
On the last day, a native Spanish speaker interviewed the user in Spanish on his thoughts on the
PRSVs and asked him which valve he wanted to keep.
Existing
1st New Valve
2nd New Valve
3rd New Valve
D
K
H
B
3
3
1
3
PRSV
PRSV
Overall Satisfaction Score Based on All
Responses
KEY: 1 - unsatisfied, 2 - somewhat satisfied, 3 - completely satisfied
ERG Notes
None.
None.
None.
None.
D-75
Pre-Rinse Spray Valves Field Study Report
Table D-31. The Fireplace Restaurant Facility Operations Survey Responses
Questions
Typical hours of facility operation
General type of food the facility serves for each mealtime
Number of customers served and/or volume of dishes washed (per day, per
week)
Any information about atypical business (i.e., special events)
D-76
Whether water is heated by electricity, natural gas, or other means
Whether PRSVs use hot water, cold water, or both
Whether a mixing valve on the faucet feeds the PRSV
How long the spray valves usually last and/or how frequently they are replaced
Any changes in the type of food served
Responses
Sunday–Wednesday: 11 a.m.–10 p.m., Thursday–Saturday: 11
a.m.–11 p.m.
American cuisine for lunch and dinner Monday–Friday and
brunch and dinner Saturday–Sunday
Provided in data tables above
A water ban was in effect in Boston during the second new
valve monitoring period, but the spray valve was still used
because the dishwasher provided water hot enough to sanitize
the dishes.
Natural Gas
Both
No
Existing spray valve was installed in 2005
None