## 3 Results and Discussion
### Failure Modes and Crack Patterns
Peak 1 was observed in this beam when the spalling of the concrete cover occurred. This was followed by observation on the horizontal cracks at the compression zone underneath the loading points. The peak 1 loading for this beam was 635 kN. Additionally, the beam was able to carry additional loads and exhibit reserve capacity (pseudo ductility). Notably, there was a remarkable increase in the load-bearing capacity of the beam at this stage until the observation of peak 2 at 837.6 kN load. The peak loading ranged from \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Specimens Designation** & **P\({}_{\text{Spall}}\) (kN)** & **P\({}_{\text{Yield}}\) (kN)** & **P\({}_{\text{analy}}\) (kN)** & **P\({}_{\text{analy}}\)/P\({}_{\text{Spall}}\) (\%)** & **P\({}_{\text{analy}}\)/P\({}_{\text{Yield}}\) (\%)** & **Failure Mode** \\ \hline CB & 356 & - & 354 & 0.98 & - & crushing, brittle failure \\  & & & & & & spalling under \\ BCSP-6 & 521 & - & 514 & 0.98 & - & two loading \\  & & & & & & point(compression-shear) \\  & & & & & & and yield of steel plate \\ BCSP-10 & 635 & - & 637 & 1.00 & - & loading point and yield of \\  & & & & & & & steel plate \\ BCSP-15 & - & 935.3 & 850 & - & 0.90 & - \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Experimental and predicted nominal loads and the type of failures of the tested. Figure 8: Modes of failure and crack patterns of all the CB, BCSP-6, BCSP-10, and BCSP-15 beam specimens at 80% peak load. 801.25 to 794.7 kN. The concrete on the top of the surface was not damaged even at the point of failure of the beam. Subsequently, its failure took place in a flexural mode with a slight horizontal cracking, as shown in Tables 3 and 4, Figures 7c and 8c. The last specimen, the BCSP-15 beam, was developed using 15 mm thickness of steel plate. As a result, the beam remained stiff despite the widening of the cracks. The peak 1 loading for this beam was observed as 935.3 kN. The beam sustained the additional load, exhibiting the reserved capacity or pseudo ductility properties. Other than that, a stabilized and continuous load-bearing capacity was evident at the B stage of loading into phase C due to the 935.3 kN increase in displacement. Phase D led to the decline in the loading capacity into the phase F. Despite the failure of the beam, there was no damage at the top of the concrete. Subsequently, the beam failure took place in the flexural mode without horizontal cracking, as shown in Tables 3 and 4, Figures 7d and 8d. The procedures for the failures of the BCSP-6 and BCSP-10 beams were similar in terms of the concrete crushing at the loading points. Furthermore, the failure mode of these beams had been developed through a bolting steel plate. Moreover, the failures of the BCSP-6, BCSP-10, and BCSP-15 beams occurred with a yield of steel plate. However, no buckling was involved. As the cross-section was unaltered, a high load capacity could be maintained in the beams after the peak load for the BCSP-10 and BCSP-15 beams. Therefore, three types of failure modes were present in the over-reinforced beams, namely (1) the crushing of concrete cover at compression mid-span, (2) initial spalling of concrete cover and crushing underneath the loading point, and (3) the flexural failure. Additionally, an extension of the shear cracks was present, including an increase in the crack width within the span. The flexural cracks were formed at an approximate average spacing, which ranged from 80 to 120 mm. The stress-strain diagrams were used to compute the analytical load capacities (P\({}_{\text{analy}}\)) based on the RC specifications of the ACI-code [33]. This computation was also performed on the analytical load capacities based on the results of the material test, as shown in Table 4.