{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013774104683195593, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0036730945821854912, 'mean_word_length': 5.264367816091954, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Experimental evaluation of cyclic loading test procedure including gravity load on RC beams

Test setups and loading histories aim to replicate the real conditions of the building structures. However, most of the tests on beams found in literature do not include gravity loads in the cyclic loading history. An experimental campaign was carried out. Two beam specimens, named CB0 and CB1, designed to exhibit different failure modes were subjected to a loading protocol that involved the imposition of reversed cyclic loading and simultaneous gravity load. The aim was to validate the test procedure for different beam failure modes. Consequently, specimen CB1 failed by rupture of the tensile reinforcing bars while specimen CB0 failed due to concrete crushing and buckling of the compressed reinforcing bars. Results show that the presented loading protocol does not control the failure mode of the specimens. The specimens were also simulated numerically, and the results were comparable with the experimental observations in terms of load capacities, crack patterns, and failure modes.