stress profiles of the no-culvert case (Figure B-2)

as opposed to 440.56 kips for the traditional analy-

and the actual case (Figure A-11 of Appendix A)

sis technique. The line of action for the resultant

shows the effect of the culvert on the normal stress

force from the finite element analysis was 8.58 ft to

profile. The variation of normal stresses to near

the right of the toe as opposed to 8.57 ft from the

zero values between 15.0 and 25.0 ft in Figure A-11

traditional analysis technique.

of Appendix A does not exist in the stress profile of

Figure B-2. The normal stress profile of Fig-

ure B-2 exhibits a near linear response from a loca-

file along the base of the monolith for a crack

tion near the monolith toe to the crack tip. This

length of 16.65 ft is shown in Figure B-3. The

response is more closely approximated using the

distance along the base of the monolith is measured

from the toe of the monolith to the heel of the

traditional method of analysis. This provides fur-

ther validity to the argument that the proximity of

monolith. The effect of the culvert is shown further

the culvert to the base of the monolith has a sub-

by comparison of results of the no culvert case

(Figure B-3) and the case considering the culvert

stantial effect on the transfer of normal stresses in

(Figure A-12 of Appendix A). The shear stress

that region.

profile of Figure B-3 is relatively constant except

for the edge effects. However, the variation in

(2) The resultant force in the vertical direction

shear stresses of Figure A-12 of Appendix A is

and the line of action for the resultant force were

computed for the finite element solution (as

more significant. The resultant horizontal force was

described in paragraph 3*d*(4) of Appendix A) and

computed for the finite element solution by integra-

for the traditional analysis technique. An equivalent

tion of the stress along the base of the monolith and

force system with a crack length of 16.65 ft rather

the traditional analysis technique. The resultant

than the final crack length of 19.62 ft was used in

force from the finite element analysis was

the computations using assumptions of the tradi-

247.45 kips as opposed to 249.78 kips from the

tional analysis technique. The calculated resultant

traditional analysis technique.

force for the finite element analysis was 447.97 kips

B-3