ResearchArticle BehaviorofReinforcedCompositeFoamed•Normal ConcreteBeams AnghamNassarJafal ,AmeerA.Hilal ,andAkramS.Mahmoud Department of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Anbar, Ramadi, Iraq Correspondence should be addressed to Angham Nassar Jafal; ang20e1003@uoanbar.edu.iq Received 25 April 2023; Revised 7 July 2023; Accepted 26 July 2023; Published 1 August 2023 Academic Editor: Claudio Mazzotti Copyright © 2023 Angham Nassar Jafal et al. Tis is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. A study has been undertaken to investigate the production and behavior of beams made with foamed, normal, and composite concrete and reinforced with diferent steel percentages (under, balanced, and over). Nine reinforcement beams, including three normal•weight concrete, three lightweight foamed concrete, and three composite concrete, were made with similar rectangular cross sections of dimensions (150 × 250 mm) and length of 1500 mm. A 28•day compressive strength of 29 MPa (suitable for structural purposes) was achieved for all investigated concrete mixes. Ultimate load, crack mode, ductility, defection, and stifness as fexural parameters were investigated. Te results showed that in terms of loading, the load of composite concrete beams was equal to that of normal concrete beams, and a slight increase in the lightweight foamed concrete beams was noticed. Te ductility of foamed concrete beams with balanced reinforcement and under reinforcing was lower than that of normal concrete. In the case of the over•reinforcement beams, the ductility of foamed concrete beam increased by about 19.5% compared to that of normal reinforced concrete. In addition, the ductility and stifness of composite concrete beams increased by about 91.7% and 5.6% compared to normal beams and 61% and 15.1% compared to foamed concrete beams, respectively. 1.Introduction Te Romans were the frst to discover that agitating a mixture of small gravels, coarse sand, heated limestone, water, and animal blood resulted in the formation of tiny gas bubbles, which enhanced the mixture. Tis discovery was made during the frst century of the Common Era [1, 2]. Several nations, including the United Kingdom, Germany, the Philippines, urkey, and Tailand, use foamed concrete (FC) in construction [3]. Foamed concrete is distinguished by its low density (400–1850kg/m 3 ) and its intermittent air holes, which result from adding a foam agent combination to the mortar [1]. For structural applications, the density should be between 1350 and 1900kg/m 3 , and the com• pressive strength should be greater than 17 MPa [4]. In the study by J. H. an et al. [5], fexure behavior oftwo reinforced foamed concrete beams with cement•sand ratios W1 and W2 was compared to conventional concrete beams with densities of 1,750 kg/m 3 and compressive strengths of 25MPa. It was determined that foamed concrete beams carry 22% to 24% less fnal load than standard•weight concrete beams and can perform 54% for W1 and 49% for W2 over their design capacity. In addition, lightweight reinforced concrete beams typically defect 13 to 20% more than normal•weight reinforced concrete beams. However, the reinforced foamed concrete beams exhibited less dis• placement ductility than the normal•weight reinforced concrete beams. Lee et al. [6] investigated the fexural characteristics of reinforced normal concrete beams and slabs composed of foamed concrete at densities from 1700 to 1800 kg/m 3 . Te investigators recorded their observational fndings. Four foamed concrete beams and three conventional•weight concrete beams were investigated. In order to achieve the prescribed compressive strength of 20MPa intended for structural applications within 28 days, the four lightweight foamed concrete mixes were generated by utilizing varying cement•sand and water•cement ratios. From the fndings, Hindawi Journal of Engineering Volume 2023, Article ID 3653472, 11 pages https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/3653472