## 5 Conclusions
* The nonlinear semi-numeric computational procedure based on the moment-curvature relation with tensile strength properties calculated with simplified expressions from the _fib Model Code for Concrete Structures 2010_[17] was in relatively lesser agreement with the averaged experimental results, whereas the calculated load-displacement curve closely aligned with the averaged experimental result at the maximum load, with an accuracy of approximately 0.02 mm and 0.19 kN, and at the CMOD value of 2.5 mm, with an accuracy of approximately 0.06 mm and 0.01 kN, the alignment of the load-displacement results demonstrated less than satisfactory alignment for the CMOD value of 0.5 mm, with an accuracy of approximately 0.02 mm and 1.75 kN, indicating a notable discrepancy between the experimental and computational outcomes. The relatively lesser agreement can be attributed to the fact that tensile strength properties were calculated with simplified expressions from the _fib Model Code for Concrete Structures 2010_[17], which resulted in a notably higher residual tensile strength at the CMOD value of 0.5 mm and a lower residual tensile strength at the CMOD value of 2.5 mm compared with the back-calculated residual tensile strength values. Contrary to the experimental observations and contrary to the back-calculated residual tensile strength values, the residual tensile strength values calculated with simplified expressions from the _fib Model Code for Concrete Structures 2010_[17] give an impression of post-crack softening behavior (with the difference between the residual tensile strength at the CMOD value of 0.5 mm being approximately 0.01 kN lower than the residual tensile strength at the CMOD value of 2.5 mm). * The finite element analysis with the Menetrey-Willam material model, which used the back-calculated tensile strength and considered a constant residual tensile strength equal to the back-calculated residual tensile strength at the CMOD value of 0.5 mm, was in expectedly lesser agreement with the averaged experimental results compared with the computational procedure based on the moment-curvature relation with back-calculated tensile strength properties. In comparison with the computational procedure relying on the moment-curvature relation, wherein tensile strength properties were determined through simplified expressions drawn from the _fib Model Code for Concrete Structures 2010_[17], the correlation between the finite element analysis load-displacement outcomes and the experimental results did not exhibit a degradation in quality: the results at the maximum load were accurate to 0.02 mm and 0.05 kN, at the CMOD value of 0.5 mm the results were accurate to 0.02 mm and 0.61 kN, and the results at the CMOD value of 2.5 mm were accurate to approximately 0.05 mm and 1.44 kN. Considering the straightforward Menetrey-Willam material model with its concise input parameters, performing finite element analyses with this material model and a carefully chosen constant residual tensile strength presents a practical way to analyze structural elements made of fiber-reinforced concrete. In this study, we picked the lowest value of the residual tensile strength within the CMOD range of 0.5 mm to 2.5 mm for the constant residual tensile strength. Consequently, the finite element analysis results present a lower limit of the investigated fiber-reinforced concrete prisms' behavior within the CMOD range of 0.5 mm to 2.5 mm. Although the force results slightly overestimated the load-bearing capacity around a CMOD value of 0.5 mm, the calculated forces still came closer to the experimentally determined value (at a CMOD of 0.5 mm) compared with the results of the nonlinear semi-numeric computational procedure based on the moment-curvature relation where tensile strength properties were determined using simplified expressions from the _fib Model Code for Concrete Structures 2010_[17]. The authors declare no conflicts of interest.