Several important points have been totally overlooked so far. Slot washers can be designed which siphon off the bottom,
and then up and out of a top drain port, as well as potentially allowing for some removal directly from the bottom and the top. That's why dye tests are important, to understand the real circulation as well as the ideal flow rate. In a competent system, ALL of the test dye will exit in a predictable and fairly quick manner; none will accumulate at the bottom or be left in suspension. Yet a good washer design will not be water wasteful either.
But aggressive water input might create a laminar flow effect which presses the paper against the septums, or otherwise actually hinders a steady soaking out of the hypo. Repetitive fill and drain cycles might work OK, but will require a lot more water if a quantity of moderatley large prints is involved.
Then there's the problem of the septums themselves, and if there are just too many of them in there holding the paper too tightly. Mine are all dimpled so that the paper can't stick to the plastic; water easily flows around both the front and back of the print, and that also keeps the prints suspended between their septums, rather than sticking to them.
You should do dye tests with the Kodak tray siphon too. When the amount of water flow is correct in relation to the tray size, there will be a steady circular flow in the tray from the device and then back into its outlet component. These work well, but cannot handle a quantity of prints efficiently, and consume quite a bit of water.
In many parts of the world, water is increasingly becoming a precious commodity requiring thoughtful use. And where it is scarce, it's also more likely to have greater mineral content as well as added chlorine. Those can be filtered out; but good filters aren't cheap, and need to be frequently replaced.