Seismosoft | Earthquake Engineering Solutions

You can do this in two ways:
1) The easier is to use the static time-history analysis type, with a combination of force and displacement time-history loads. The force loading should be zero in the second part of the analysis and the displacement load should be zero in the first part of the analysis. Note however that this might not be feasible in the cases when the DOFs, where the displacement loads are applied in the second phase, need to be free to deform in the first part
2) With pushover analysis, using a sequence of load control and response control phases in opposite directions, i.e. (i) load control +X, (ii) load control -X, (iii) response control, +X, (iv) response control -X etc.

In any case, note that typically a static time-history analysis with displacement hysteretic loads should normally be sufficient in most cases of tests.
Seismosoft Support

As I explained in my previous message, you cannot apply on the same DOF simultaneously a displacement and a force time history.
You might want to try with the pushover analysis with a sequence of phases.
Seismosoft Support

Hi there!

Does Seismostruct has a step-by-step tutorial on how to conduct a cyclic pushover analysis using sequence of load cases? I am new to this software and still exploring. I badly need this in doing a verfication model for an rc column subjected to slow cyclic loading.

You might try the Verification Report and associated SeismoStruct files. In particular, Chapter 4, Example 3 may be helpful. There are others which may suit your needs as well. The SeismoStruct YouTube videos may help too, though I am not sure if there is anything specific to cyclic pushover as I haven't investigated the YouTube channel extensively.

You can either use pushover analysis with a series of Response Control phases, or alternatively static time-history analysis with different loading curves.
Seismosoft Support