displacement ductility of the tube beam was approximately 17% higher than the

displacement ductility of the control beam.

 Both ductility factors identify the ductility improvement that was evident from the

load-displacement curves and at the same time quantify it as been 17% or 33% depending

on the ductility factor used.

 The curvature ductility factor using the fiber model moment-curvature diagram of

the control beam was approximately 1.58 which was approximately 4% higher than the

experimental. On the other hand, the curvature ductility factor of the tube beam was

approximately 2.56 which was an overestimate of approximately 27%.

 The fiber model curvature ductility factor for the tube beam was an overestimated

compared to experimental curvature ductility factor. Than can be due to failure of the

CFRP grid at lower strain than the one assumed in the fiber model that used a stress-stain

curve for grid confined concrete based on grid cylinder tests. However, only one beam

was tested and therefore it is unknown whether the fiber model consistently overestimates

the curvature ductility of CFRP grid confined beams.

 Conclusions

 In this chapter the testing of two compression controlled concrete beams was

described and results from the tests were presented. The results from the experimental

results were compared to results obtained using two models.

 Based on the results presented in this chapter the following conclusions can be

drawn:

* The results from the two beams indicate that the CFRP grid provided confinement to
 the concrete. Confinement was achieved using a series of small diameter CFRP grid
 tubes rather than wrapping the entire cross-section.