## 4 Pseudo-Dynamic Test System  
### Overview of the Pseudo-Dynamic Test  
The test methods used to investigate the nonlinear response of a building to earthquakes can be mainly divided into the shaking table test and the pseudo-dynamic test, which includes the cyclic loading test [17]. The shaking table test is a very efficient technique for evaluating the response of a building to earthquakes. Because the size and weight of a structural specimen are limited by the size and capacity of the shaking table, scale models of the specimen are mostly used. This size reduction leads to a similarity problem with the actual building.  
Consequently, owing to the limitations caused by the size reduction, the cyclic loading test wherein the load and displacement were controlled was used to evaluate the nonlinear structural behavior of actual buildings. The pseudo-dynamic test was proposed by combining the benefits of the cyclic loading and shaking table tests [18]. It is an experimental method that combines structural testing with numerical integration-based dynamic analysis. It consists of a numerical calculation part using a computer and a specimen loading part via structural testing. In the numerical calculation (computer), the equation of motion is calculated using the numerical integration method and based on the seismic response of the structural specimen to its displacement, which was measured under loading, input seismic acceleration, and seismic response in the present step to calculate the displacement for the seismic response in the next step.  
The calculated seismic response displacement was applied to the structural specimen using an actuator to measure the displacement owing to loading. By repeating the above procedure, the seismic performance of the target building specimen was evaluated by applying the response displacement of an earthquake that is similar to the structural specimen and calculating the seismic response (displacement, velocity, and acceleration) using a computer.  
The pseudo-dynamic test is similar to the cyclic loading test, excluding the fact that the seismic displacement to be applied to the building is determined during the test via numerical integration using an analytical method. In general, the restoration force characteristics of the building must be assumed during the calculation of the seismic  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Members** & **Member Length** & **V\({}_{\text{anchor}}\)** & **N \({}^{\text{c}}\)** & **\(\Sigma\)P \({}^{\text{d}}\)** & **\(\Sigma\)V\({}_{\text{anchor}}\)\({}^{\text{e}}\)** & **Safety Factor** \\ \hline Beam & LB \({}^{\text{a}}\) & & 20 & 257.1 & 523.2 & 2.0 \\ \hline Columns & LC \({}^{\text{b}}\) & & 18 & 216.5 & 470.9 & 2.2 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* \({}^{\text{a}}\) L\({}_{\text{g}}\): beam length; \({}^{\text{b}}\) L\({}_{\text{c}}\): column length; \({}^{\text{c}}\) N: number of anchors; \({}^{\text{d}}\)\(\Sigma\)P: lateral load capacity of the frame; \({}^{\text{e}}\)\(\Sigma\)Vanchor: shear capacity of installed anchors.  
\end{table}
Table 3: Results of the joint anchor design using the CCSS method.  
response using nonlinear dynamic analysis. However, the pseudo-dynamic test may have very similar effects to the actual seismic response characteristics when the restoration force of the specimen is directly measured.