On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 11:18:23 -0800, Richard Clark
wrote:

#1
-1.8421 3.0697 83.6493 -25.311 25.3112 82.7236

Hi Art,

Anticipating you can't answer the last one about mechanical
orientation, let's examine your proficiency in using a computor with
this one element which in your words displays:
"Drive impedance of Element #1 equals
30.7 + j 0.1 ohms,
SWR = 1.01"

If we skip the modeling, once again simple bench work, not:
1. A text book;
2. NEC;
3. A computer;
4. A new theory
would reveal a SWR of 1.01 for a drive Z of 31 Ohms is a most curious
departure from convention - or did Gauss mandate a 31 Ohm system (you
certainly don't put this into your words).

The next error in light of this is (your words):
"Drive impedance of Element #2 equals
1121 + j 1554 ohms,
SWR = 3.65"

3.65:1 really? In the same 31 Ohm system? A new one for each
element? We need only look at the third example with nearly the same
mismatch, but a wildly different drive impedance to wonder from your
words that:
"Drive impedance of Element #3 equals
16.2 - j 22.4 ohms,
SWR = 3.64"

3.64:1 really? In what system are all these elements residing?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC