## 4 Analysis of Research Results  
By analyzing the influences of the angle and depth of the damage on the behavior and nature of the destruction, the models could be divided into three main patterns of destruction (see Figure 3). The behavior of the columns under the load of eccentrically applied compressive force and the nature of their destruction were significantly influenced by two of the three selected factors of variation: the angle and the depth of the damage. The height of the test model, as a third factor, in the range from 1000 to 2500 mm, affected the results much less. Our study showed that the breakdown deviations of different heights of models (1000, 1750, and 2500 mm) varied from 0 to 40 kN, i.e., 0-12%. This was small compared to the largest difference in the bearing capacity of the test models--340 kN--that, expressed as a percentage, was 179%, which was the result of comparing an undamaged test model and the model with the maximum damage (angle: 0 \({}^{\circ}\); depth: 100 mm (h/2)). Longitudinal bending was observed in all the test models in the direction of the force plane (\(x\)-axis), which in all the models had a greater moment of inertia of the damaged cross-section. From this, we can conclude that the off-center position of the load on the \(x\)-axis was the main reason for the bending of the models. By analyzing the influences of the angle and the depth of damage on the behavior and nature of the destruction of the models could be divided into three main patterns of destruction. The first group according to the pattern of destruction included models of maximum damage, with an angle of 0\({}^{\circ}\) in combination with all the depths (20, 60, and 100 mm). Damage at an angle of 0\({}^{\circ}\) under loading further contributed to the longitudinal bending of the test models in the expected direction along the \(x\)-axis (of course, in the direction opposite to the side of the load). The longitudinal bending in the \(y\)-axis direction was insignificant and significantly smaller than that in the \(x\)-axis direction. The signs were both  
Figure 2: Construction for testing devices on model. positive and negative. For models with a depth of damage of 100 mm (h/2), the bearing capacity was the lowest, and the local longitudinal bending of the rods began quite early. Even at levels of 0.55... 0.6 Nu (where Nu is the maximum destroy load), cracks began to appear in the concrete. The deformations of concrete and reinforcement reached the limit values in the central sections of the columns. The second group of models according to the pattern of destruction classified test models with different combinations of average (30\({}^{\circ}\)) and minimum (60\({}^{\circ}\)) angles with average (60 mm) and maximum (100 mm) depths of damage. The measurement results showed that the intact face (h) of the test models was curved outwards, that is, the test models were bent in the direction of the \(y\)-axis, in the opposite direction of the damaged part of the cross-sections of the test models. Significant longitudinal bending of the test models with variation factors (30\({}^{\circ}\); 60 mm) in the specified direction along the \(y\)-axis was observed when the load reached 0.85-0.9 Nu and increased rapidly until the moment of destruction; at the same time, cracks in the concrete, first on the undamaged sides of the prototypes, began to appear at load levels of 0.8 to 0.9 Nu. This behavior of the models was associated with damage to the cross-section at an angle, i.e., the position of the damage itself, which led to a loss in the load-bearing capacity of the reinforcing rod. Destruction was observed in the damaged parts of the sections. Cracks in the concrete were fixed at loads of 0.85-0.95 Nu in places of future destruction or the chipping of concrete. In all the models, there were almost no cracks through which, at the time of destruction, there was no splitting or chipping of the concrete.