Table 3: Response ratio, for Peak and RMS Responses for various control strategies under Imperial Valley, 1940 earthquake ( , , ).

Response quantitiesControl strategyPassive-offPassive-onSemiactive clipped-optimal control

for 0.569030.527360.51507
(7.32%)(9.48%)
for 0.652280.542860.54447
(16.77%)(16.53%)
for 0.717090.618660.59502
(13.73%)(17.02%)
for 0.565000.362060.36790
(35.92%)(35.89%)
for 0.610110.612660.60387
Based on peak response(−0.42%)(1.02%)
for 0.677200.612260.61318
(9.59%)(9.45%)
for 0.763900.725240.71258
(5.06%)(6.72%)
for 0.536900.367410.36840
(31.57%)(31.38%)
/ 0.014010.020000.02000
(−42.80%)(−42.80%)
/ 0.014070.020000.02000
(−42.11%)(−42.11%)

for 0.610040.492220.52683
(19.31%)(13.64%)
for 0.528620.366080.38857
(30.75%)(26.49%)
for 0.509510.384610.41568
(24.51%)(19.17%)
for 0.426650.248740.26326
(41.70%)(38.30%)
for 0.680250.673660.63343
Based on RMS response(0.97%)(6.88%)
for 0.556060.460180.44690
(17.24%)(19.63%)
for 0.551710.538700.49283
(2.36%)(10.67%)
for 0.447230.297530.29076
(33.47%)(34.99%)
/ 0.007180.016190.00969
(−125.49%)(−34.88%)
/ 0.007340.016270.00922
(−121.68%)(−25.63%)

(Numbers in parentheses indicate percentage reduction as compared to the passive-off case. Positive numbers correspond to a response reduction.)