You are an expert at summarizing long articles. Proceed to summarize the following text:

You are an expert at summarizing long articles. Proceed to summarize the following text: 
CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS 
       [0001]    This application is claims benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/852,102 entitled “FAILURE AVOIDANCE SILT FENCE,” filed Oct. 16, 2006, the contents of which are hereby incorporated by reference. 
     
    
     FIELD OF THE INVENTION 
       [0002]    This disclosure relates to soil retention methods and devices in general, and, more specifically, to a failure avoidance silt fence. 
       BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 
       [0003]    Construction and large-scale landscaping operations often involve the removal or displacement of topsoil and plant matter serving to prevent erosion. Silt, clay, sediment, and other ground matter may then be swept away by runoff. The silt and other material may be carried suspended in runoff water until it is deposited in creeks, rivers, or still bodies of water. This can have a deleterious effect on wildlife and the environment. Traditional silt fences have been used as a measure for controlling runoff and erosion and to slow the displacement of silt and its subsequent deposition in undesirable locations. A traditional silt fence may be nothing more than a semi-permeable barrier placed in the flow of runoff. 
         [0004]    A number of problems arise with conventional silt fences. These include, among others, failure of the silt fence to trap sediment due to scour from concentrated flow along the toe, resulting in undercutting of the toe and discharge of sediment underneath the fence. Failure to trap sediment due to failure of the posts and excessive stretching and sagging of the fence can allow sediment to flow over the fence. This phenomenon is known as overtopping of the fence. Failure to trap clay and fine silt due to inadequate settling time has also been a problem. 
         [0005]    Attempts to solve the problem of post failure and excessive sagging have been focused on using stronger posts and adding a wire mesh backing to the fence. These solutions are problematic because of the added costs for materials and installation. 
         [0006]    One solution for the failure of a traditional silt fence to trap clay and fine silt due to inadequate settling time was to provide an ox-bow shaped installation formed by extending the downstream end of a silt fence uphill. This creates an impoundment at the downstream end. This solution is also problematic since impoundment drainage areas are typically sufficiently large that a significant quantity of runoff water and sediment is concentrated at the point. As a result, the impoundment is likely to fill up, resulting in uncontrolled sediment flow overtopping the silt fence or flowing around the uphill end. 
         [0007]    What is needed is a system and method for addressing the above, and related, problems. 
       SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION 
       [0008]    The present invention disclosed and claimed herein, in one aspect thereof, includes a silt fence structure. The silt fence structure has a water permeable fence, and an apron having first and second edges, the first edge providing a buried apron toe, the second edge attaching to the water permeable fence. At least one flow barrier is attached to the water permeable fence and to the apron so as to impede lateral runoff flow along the water permeable fence. The water permeable fence may also provide a buried fence toe. 
         [0009]    In one embodiment, the at least one flow barrier has a generally right triangular shape providing first and second edges attaching to the water permeable fence and the apron, respectively. In another embodiment, the at least one flow barrier has a curved triangular shape with first and second straight legs attaching to the water permeable fence and the apron, respectively, and a curved leg spanning between the water permeable fence and the apron. A plurality of flow barriers may attach to the water permeable fence at substantially the same location. 
         [0010]    In some embodiments, the silt fence structure will comprise at least one fence post attached to the water permeable fence. A backing plate may be positioned along the fence post and attached to the fence post such that the water permeable fence and the flow barrier interpose the backing plate and the fence post where the flow barrier is attached to the fence. 
         [0011]    In some embodiments, a floculant is applied to the apron so as to disperse into runoff over the apron. In another embodiment, at least one geo textile pouch containing floculant is attached to the apron so as to disperse floculant into runoff over the apron. In another embodiment, the apron is further comprised of first and second layers with a floculant placed therebetween so as to disperse into runoff over the apron. 
         [0012]    The present invention, disclosed and claimed herein, in another aspect thereof comprises a method of controlling erosion on a sloped soil surface having an upstream and a downstream direction. The method includes planting a plurality of fence posts into the soil, attaching a silt fence between the plurality of posts, and providing an apron along the fence near the toe portion extending overground from the fence in an upstream direction to an apron toe. The apron toe may be buried in the soil. At least one flow barrier may be attached between the fence and the apron. 
         [0013]    In one embodiment, the method includes spraying a floculant onto the apron. In another embodiment, the method includes imbuing the apron with a floculant. 
     
    
     
       BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS 
         [0014]    The present invention is illustrated by way of example and is not meant to be limited by the accompanying drawings, in which like reference numbers indicate similar parts: 
           [0015]      FIG. 1  is a perspective view of one embodiment of a silt fence according to aspects of the present disclosure; 
           [0016]      FIG. 2  is a perspective view of another embodiment of a silt fence according to aspects of the present disclosure; 
           [0017]      FIG. 3  is a comparison chart illustrating the efficiency of a traditional silt fence versus a silt fence according to aspects of the present disclosure; 
           [0018]      FIG. 4  is a perspective view of another embodiment of a silt fence according to aspects of the present disclosure; 
           [0019]      FIG. 5  is a perspective view of a flow barrier attached to an apron and fence according to aspects of the present disclosure; 
           [0020]      FIG. 6  is an exploded view of a flow barrier, fence, and fence post attachment according to aspects of the present disclosure; and 
           [0021]      FIG. 7  is a close up view of a fence post attached to a silt fence according to aspects of the present disclosure. 
       
    
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS 
       [0022]      FIG. 1  shows a perspective view of one embodiment of a silt fence  100  according to aspects of the present disclosure. Also illustrated in  FIG. 1  are the contour lines C of the prevailing landscape along with the arrows F indicating the direction of flow of runoff. In some embodiments, an apron  102  is provided to protect the soil  103  at a toe  104  of a fence wall  108 . Flow barriers  106  may be provided to prevent concentrated runoff flow along the toe  104 . Application of polyacrylamide or another floculant, as described in greater detail below, may be used to aggregate fine particles and enhance settling. The combination of the strength of the fence wall  108  and spacing D of the posts  110  keeps stretching and sagging to an acceptable level under anticipated water and sediment loading. The apron  102 , fence wall  108 , and flow barriers  106  may be made from various geotextile materials. The materials chosen may be selected based upon the desired strength, longevity, and overall cost of the fence  100 . 
         [0023]    Some embodiments described herein will use a different material for the apron  102  than the fence wall  108 . The apron  102  may be constructed with a heavier and tightly woven geotextile material to control the flow of water beneath the apron  102 . The heavier material will minimize the stretching of the fabric during mechanized installation and spread very well on the ground. This may also minimize seepage of the impounded flow through the apron  102 . 
         [0024]    In one embodiment, the materials of the fence wall  108  and apron  102  are attached by sewing the pieces together with at least one single seam using polyester thread. Hot glue may be applied continuously, or at intervals, on the stitch to prevent any unraveling of the thread. Some embodiments will use hot glue exclusively. 
         [0025]    In operation, as runoff approaches the fence  100  in the direction of the arrows F, it flows over the apron  102 , which protects the toe  104  of the fence wall  108 . An uphill end, or toe  112 , of the apron  102  may be anchored by laying it in a toe trench and backfilling it. The toe trench may be compacted and the apron  102  is folded back over the compacted toe trench protecting the buried apron toe  112  and preventing erosion. Thus, in one embodiment, the problem of toe scour and undercutting seen in the conventional silt fence design is addressed by locating an apron upslope of the fence wall  108 . 
         [0026]    Settling time can be increased by the introduction of the flow barriers  106  along the fence  100  and application of a floculant such as polyacrylamide. Polyacrylamide (PAM) aids in flocculation (aggregation) of fine particles and decreases the settling time, when mixed with the runoff flow. This enhances the trapping of clay and fine silt particles. Examples of application of polyacrylamide within the context of the present disclosure discussed further below. 
         [0027]    A series of impoundments  114  (shown containing runoff) may be formed by the interception of the flow along the fence by flow barriers  106 . This may prevent concentrated flow from forming along the toe  104  of the fence  100  and increase the detention time allowing more sediment to settle from the runoff. Additionally, the series of small impoundments result in settling sediment more or less continuously along the fence and may prevent the overtopping problem posed by forming an ox-bow shape at the downstream end. 
         [0028]    With respect to sagging and post failure, the silt fence wall material  108  of the present disclosure may be made of a fabric that is stronger than conventional fence with posts  110  appropriately spaced so that unacceptable stretching does not occur. The final selection of fabric and post spacing may be based on computer and/or laboratory testing to determine the maximum post spacing for each fabric before unacceptable deformation occurs, along with an economic analysis of the trade-off between installing fewer posts with stronger (more costly) fabric or installing more posts and using lower-strength fabric. In one embodiment, stronger fabric will be constructed by reinforcing the polypropylene woven fabric (conventional silt fence material) with polyester fibers. This technique may mitigate the need to install a wire backing in addition to the fence itself and the cost associated therewith. A series of small impoundments  114  defined by the structure of the fence  100  may also aid in uniform load distribution along the fence  100  preventing excessive stretching and sagging at low spots. Runoff is shown in the impoundments  114  for illustration. 
         [0029]    Referring now to  FIG. 2 , a perspective view of another embodiment of a silt fence  200  according to aspects of the present disclosure is shown. The silt fence of  FIG. 2  is similar to the silt fence of  FIG. 1  with some modification as described below. In order to further minimize the disturbance caused to the parent soil during installation, the toe trench installation method can be eliminated. Instead, the toe  112  of the apron  102  is tucked into a narrow slit in the ground and compacted. A vibratory plow or high speed concrete cutting saw may be used to make the narrow slit in the ground wide enough to insert the silt fence material. To prevent the wind from blowing underneath the apron during heavy storms, the toe  104  of the fence wall  108  may be buried along with a downhill apron toe  201 . 
         [0030]    In the present embodiment, the shape of the flow barriers  202  is changed from straight triangular (as in  FIG. 1 ) to a curved triangular structure to facilitate trapping. The curved shape functions as a bag of sorts and intercepts and stores sediment. Additionally, to accommodate the change in flow contours (topography) along the construction site, the flow barriers  202  may be installed as dual barriers as shown in  FIG. 2 . This will enhance the trapping of the sediment as the runoff flow will be intercepted by either of the flow barriers at each post. 
         [0031]    The silt fence  200  of  FIG. 2  is illustrated as being installed along two distinct slopes as illustrated by the placement of the contour lines C and the arrows F indicating runoff direction. However, it is understood that the fence  200  could be installed along a single slope. Furthermore, any of the embodiments described herein may be useful for installation along single slopes or multiple slopes on the prevailing landscape as dictated by the needs of the end user. 
         [0032]    As described, a floculant may be used with various embodiments of the silt fences disclosed herein to aid aggregation of fine soil particles. Anionic polyacrylamide (PAM) is one possible choice of floculant. PAM is soil specific and needs to be mixed well with the runoff flow for effective flocculation. Anionic PAM is available is several physical forms with various formulations. In one embodiment, liquid emulsion anionic PAM will be sprayed onto the material of the fence wall  108  and/or apron  102  and dried. As the runoff flow approaches the fence PAM is mixed at the impounding areas  114  and flocculates fine particles. 
         [0033]    In another embodiment, the apron  102  may comprise at least two layers (not shown). Anionic PAM in crystal form may be spread on a non-porous layer of the apron  102  and then covered with a layer of porous polypropylene woven material. The bottom apron material and the porous top woven material are sealed at the edges to form a bag structure and hold the PAM crystals. As the runoff water approaches the fence, water seeps through the porous woven material and mixes with the PAM crystals. Thus, PAM is released at the impounding area for aggregation of fine particles. In yet another embodiment, anionic PAM wafers are stuffed in a meshed geo textile tube (not shown) and laid along the apron toe. As the runoff flow approaches the fence, it passes through the meshed geo textile tube and mixes with the PAM wafers. Thus, with any of these methods, PAM is released into the flow and flocculation takes place in the impounded area. 
         [0034]    Referring now to  FIG. 3 , a comparison chart illustrating the efficiency of a traditional silt fence versus a silt fence according to aspects of the present disclosure is shown. A silt fence constructed according the principles described above (without the use of PAM) was evaluated at the silt fence testing site (SFTS) at USDA ARS Hydraulics Lab. The fence was evaluated under a wide range of testing conditions. Tests were performed with the aid of an artificial rainfall simulator specifically designed for the silt fence testing site. In every test it was observed that the scouring of the toe and excessive stretching of the fence were substantially eliminated. Detention time and trapping of sediment drastically increased due to addition of the flow barriers. 
         [0035]      FIG. 3  illustrates the performance of a silt fence (denoted “FAEST”) built as described herein when compared to a conventional silt fence. Conventional silt fence performance data was obtained from the same silt fence testing site. Results of six field tests with identical testing parameters were considered here. The test parameters covered a combination of three different soil textures and two slopes along the fence. The ratio of total sediment load from the source area plot (EP) to total sediment discharged with the flow along the fence (UF) was calculated for a side by side comparison. For clarity, the ratios are presented as percentages in  FIG. 3 . 
         [0036]    A value of 100% or greater would indicate that there was more sediment discharged with the flow along the fence than there was sediment generated from the source area. In a conventional silt fence design, this would imply that additional sediment was generated by scouring of the toe trench which would lead to the failures described above. With a silt fence designed as described in this disclosure, the runoff flow from the source area would have to first fill the impoundments before it starts flowing around the barriers and flows along the apron toe. Thus, the total sediment load discharged in the flow along the fence is less than the sediment load discharged from the source area. These behaviors can be observed with the field test results depicted in  FIG. 3 . 
         [0037]    It can be seen in  FIG. 3  that with a conventional silt fence, 5 out of 6 tests resulted in more sediment load discharge than what was generated from the source area. This increase resulted from erosion along the fence. Also, conventional silt fence test results indicated that the fence failed with 2 out of 3 soils at 13% slope along the fence and sediment trapping efficiency was very poor. 
         [0038]    Results of the field tests for the fence designed according to aspects of the present disclosure indicated that the new design eliminated the failure modes of a conventional silt fence and performed superiorly in trapping sediment. With 4 out of 6 comparison tests the ratio of total sediment load at the source area to sediment load upstream of the fence turned out to be much less than 1, indicating significant trapping of sediment. The overall trapping efficiency of the designed fence as shown in the present disclosure was estimated to be around 90%. Also, due to increased detention time behind the fence, the trapping of fine silt and clay particles increased when compared to a conventional silt fence. Testing under extreme conditions also demonstrated that the flow across the apron does not disturb the soil under the apron and that fabric installed with a vibratory plow stays anchored. 
         [0039]      FIG. 4  is a perspective view of another embodiment of a silt fence  400  according to aspects of the present disclosure. In this embodiment, the shape of the flow barriers  402  is changed to a straight triangular shape and is attached such that it is always perpendicular to the fence wall  108 . This embodiment can result in lowered construction costs while retaining substantially all of the benefits described in the present disclosure. A computer simulation model of the hydraulics and sediment trapping was developed and used to simulate the impact of physical and hydrologic variables that determine the efficiency of the fence. These showed that the high trapping efficiency of the previously described designs may still be achieved with the modified flow barriers  402  of  FIG. 4 . 
         [0040]    The flow barrier  402  may be constructed out of the same material as the fence wall  108 . The flow barrier material  402  may be permeable and filter the impounded flow downstream to avoid overtopping of the barriers  402  and fence wall  108 . Silt fence material (e.g., polypropylene) may be cut to the required dimensions and shape. It may be pre-creased (e.g., with a hot iron) to make a two inch flap on the vertical and horizontal side of the triangular flow barrier  402 . The flow barrier  402  may be attached to the fence wall  108  and apron  102  with hot glue, rivets, or other means. If hot glue is used, immediately after attaching the flow barrier  402 , the hot glue may be spread evenly on the two inch flap with the help of a roller. 
         [0041]    Referring now to  FIG. 5 , a perspective view of a flow barrier attached to an apron and fence according to aspects of the present disclosure is shown. It can be seen that to further secure the barrier to the apron, plastic snap-on rivets  502  may be installed, possibly using a backing plate  504 . Another embodiment uses an industrial sewing machine to sew the barrier to the fence and apron. Selection of the attachment method can be based on cost and ease of operation. 
         [0042]    Referring now to  FIG. 6 , an exploded view of a flow barrier, fence, and fence post attachment according to aspects of the present disclosure is shown. The posts  110  may be metal posts with stabilizers to support the fence wall  108 . The spacing of the posts  110  can be fixed or allowed to vary depending on the site and local climate. In some embodiments, computer simulations may be used to determine post spacing. The fence and the vertical flap of the flow barrier (glued area) may be attached to the fence post using a metal backing plate  602 , with plastic push type rivets  604  as shown in  FIG. 6 . The surface of the metal backing plate  602  and post  110  may be roughened to prevent pulling of the fabric from one post interval to another, thus preventing excessive stretching. Securing the flow barrier  402  to the fence post with roughened post, metal backing plate, and plastic rivets, will give additional strength for the fence material to withstand the impoundment load. 
         [0043]    Referring now to  FIG. 7  a close up view of a fence post attached to a silt fence according to aspects of the present disclosure is shown. The silt fence  700  of  FIG. 7  is similar to those previously described but illustrates another method of attaching the fence posts  110  to the fence wall  108 . No flow barrier is illustrated in  FIG. 7  (for the sake of simplicity) but it is understood that the present method of fence post attachment may be appropriately adaptable for locations along the fence wall  108  where a flow barrier is attached to the fence post  110  see, e.g.,  FIG. 6 ). 
         [0044]    The post  110  attaching to the fence wall  108  may be a steel post. The post  110  may be at least as tall as the fence wall  108  to securely retain the fence wall  108 , and be securely implantable into the ground. In the present embodiment, the fence wall  108  is sandwiched between the post  110  and a tubular securement  702 . The post  110  may be shaped to conform to the contour of the tubular securement  702  in order to increase holding strength. This also isolates the individual fence sections such that stretching, sagging, or other deformations in one section will not necessarily affect adjacent sections. 
         [0045]    The tubular securement  702  may be an electrical or mechanical tubing piece. In one embodiment, the securement  702  is sized in length substantially similarly to the height of the portion of the post  110  that is above ground in order to fully secure the fence  108  to the post  110 . The securement  702  may attach to the post with sheet metal screws  704  or other fasteners. In one embodiment, the length of the sheetmetal screws  704  will be chosen such that the screws do not extend completely through the securement  702 . Part or all of the fence  700  may be preassembled before being installed, or the post(s)  110  may be inserted into the ground and the fence wall  108  attached to the posts  110  with the securement  702  using hand tools the site of installation. 
         [0046]    Thus, the present invention is well adapted to carry out the objectives and attain the ends and advantages mentioned above as well as those inherent therein. While presently preferred embodiments have been described for purposes of this disclosure, numerous changes and modifications will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art. Such changes and modifications are encompassed within the spirit of this invention as defined by the claims.

Summary:
A silt fence structure and method of controlling erosion are disclosed. The silt fence structure includes a water permeable fence, an apron having first and second edges, the first edge providing a buried apron toe, the second edge attaching to the water permeable fence, and at least one flow barrier attached to the water permeable fence and to the apron so as to impede lateral runoff flow along the water permeable fence.