## 1 Introduction  
Shear stirrups are commonly used to ensure that flexible failure occurs before shear failure under extreme conditions. Such reinforced concrete structures exhibit various forms of shear-related failure. It is difficult to accurately predict shear failure. Despite many experiments [1; 2; 3] and interpretations [4; 5; 6; 7; 8] over the years, shear failure remains poorly understood; the design of shear force-bearing members continues to rely on formulae derived from experimental data. The behavior after diagonal tension cracking fundamentally differs from flexural behavior after flexural cracking. Such cracking is acceptable on the tensile side of the member that receives the bending moment; the cracks do not affect member flexural strength. However, member flexural strength is influenced by diagonal tension cracking, which is caused principally by shear stress. In general, if only flexural tensile bars are placed (i.e., no other rebar is present), a diagonal tension crack will seriously compromise member behavior and strength. Many shear experiments [1; 2; 3] have shown that a single diagonal tension crack in a member web immediately extends across the entire depth of the member; the member separates into two pieces and thus fails. If rebar is not appropriately placed on the member web, an unexpected overload may result in instantaneous collapse. Thus, regardless of whether web rebar is not computationally necessary, minimum shear rebar should always be placed. This offers a visible warning before member collapse; it ensures ductility by inhibiting diagonal tension crack growth. Reinforcing steel fibers (SFs) may also ensure ductility where shear stresses dominate. The shear force when the web experiences a diagonal tension crack is the maximum force that the member can resist (i.e., the member shear strength); this is usually the concrete shear strength. For many reasons (in addition to low cost), both the reinforcements and the member itself should exhibit high-level flexural resistance. In addition, the member must not fail instantaneously/explosively(shear failure) in extremis; it should fail in a manner wherein the ductility allows gradual failure [9; 10; 11; 12; 13; 14; 15]. Previous analyses [1; 2; 3] showed that the 45\({}^{\circ}\) truss model (an ACI shear strength predictor) exhibited a 1.4-fold difference between the experimental and predicted data. To improve this difference, the MCFT model was developed in the 1980s to manage the entire load-displacement curve. The accuracy of this model improved the experimental-predictive ratio to 1.01 [4]. However, the computation was complex; a simplified MCFT method was proposed by [PERSON] et al. [8]. Simplification of shear strength prediction was important in practical terms; [PERSON] et al. [16; 17; 18; 19; 20] thus developed a two-parameter kinematic theory. A predictive equation comprehensively calculated crack width, maximum sagging, and the overall load-displacement relationship. The two kinematic degrees of freedom were the vertical displacement under the loading platen and averaged longitudinal strain of bottom reinforcement. These reflected the total shear force balance calculated using the internal moment balance and the tensile force (including the tensile reinforcement effect imparted by the bottom reinforcement and the surrounding concrete). Previously, moment balance required repetitive calculations. Thus, the predictive formula established by [PERSON] et al. [21; 22; 23] was expanded by calculating the shear resistance in the direction of the SFs. The deformation softening behavior, the SF shape, and the sine field crack of the FRC beam were all considered ([PERSON] [19], [PERSON] [20]). The tensile behaviors of steel fiber-reinforced concrete (SFRC) were derived by [PERSON] et al. [24] and [PERSON] et al. [25; 26] at various compressive strengths; the simplified diverse embedment model method established by [PERSON] et al. [25] is simple and generally accurate.