Unicorn Blogs

Quick Search Posts
Quick Browse Posts

Are you a Pro or a One?

Posted by UniBoffin at 18:00 on 24th January 2008 in UniBlog

Are you a Pro or a One?

In my last uniBlog I looked at the science behind Unicorn Sigma dart barrels and described, amongst other things, how their low MI (moment of inertia) allowed maximum scope for designing aerodynamically optimum shafts and flights for them.

I’m now going to look at this topic in a bit more detail and explain how the Sigma Pro and Sigma One steel tip darts can share the same barrels but be optimised for different standards of player. In doing so, I’ll also be touching on some of the aerodynamic theory which causes uniLab to recommend different darts for different players.

But first I want to answer a question that no-one has yet asked me, although I expect they soon would have done! If Sigma darts were designed using uniLab, why doesn’t it ever recommend them? Well, the answer is simple - Sigma barrels, shafts and flights are deliberately excluded from uniLab’s database, not only because they would tend to dominate its recommendations, but also because they were designed as a co-ordinated unit rather than for use with other components. However, rest assured that, for many players (providing they didn’t express a preference for a different barrel shape or grip), the uniLab Selector would recommend Sigma if it were allowed to do so.

And, if uniLab were so allowed and you used it to look for a steel tip dart and put in your standard as “Pro”, it would duly tend to recommend the Pro version, whereas, if you were not so ambitious with your skill rating, it would tend to recommend the One. The reason it would do that is because the program adjusts the importance of a dart’s various aerodynamic characteristics depending on standard. The better the player, the more important millimetric accuracy compared to, for example, in-flight stability.

This raises the key question of how can a dart be more accurate? After all, it’s not a guided missile; it doesn’t know where you’re aiming. If you throw it at the treble 1 rather than treble 20, the dart can’t decide you made a mistake and divert accordingly!

Well, of course it’s true that no amount of aerodynamics can compensate if a dart is thrown in the wrong direction, but it can make one thrown in the right direction miss the target. And it can do this in two main ways. Firstly, in-flight yaw as well as any asymmetries in the dart itself can cause the very aerodynamic lift which stabilises it to throw it off course. Secondly, remembering that it’s the CG of a dart which follows the trajectory along which it’s thrown but it isn’t the CG which sticks in the board, any inconsistency in a dart’s yawing motion will cause a variation in the relative locations of the CG and point at impact, and that would be a source of inaccuracy.

Unfortunately, these two mechanisms create a slight conflict of interest. The first implies that, to make a dart more accurate, the lift from its flights should be minimised. The second implies that the lift should be maximised to make the dart as stable as possible and minimise any variation in impact angle. To reconcile this conflict as best we can, we need to decide on the relative importance of these two sources of inaccuracy. This is where the standard of the player becomes a factor.

UniLab uses the principle that the throw of a better player will tend to create more consistent (and, generally, lower amplitude) yawing motion than that of their less skilful counterparts. The relative weightings on the sources of inaccuracy I’ve outlined are thus adjusted accordingly.

In addition, the lower the standard of player, the greater the importance that is placed on dart stability in its own right. Irrespective of its accuracy, a dart that flies and hits the board at pronounced angles will have less predictable aerodynamics (exactly what I mean by that I’ll explain another time) and is more likely either to bounce out (especially in soft-tip boards) or block follow-up darts.

The design logic behind the Sigma Pro and Sigma One should now be becoming a bit clearer. The low MI of the barrel means that, for both versions, the different levels of stability required can be achieved with a relatively small, low lift, flight, thereby maximising accuracy. And the required stability of the One, designed for the improving player, is greater than the required stability of the all-out-for-accuracy Pro, which is why the One has a lighter shaft and larger flights (although there’s a lot more to their design differences than just that).

And the topic for next time? Just what those “required stabilities” are and why!

There are 5 comments to this post

Posted by Ron Wilcox at 02:48 on 26th January 2008

I must say, I received the Sigma Pro darts today, Went to league with them, and well, These are the best darts i have thrown in 20 years, You did a GREAT job with these, Perfect ballance, perfect grip, and they look wild, with the slik Stik shafts, the balance was a big thing, and it works great, I for one am VERY IMPRESSED with your work, I think You have found the perfect combination for this dart, and I think it will be a hugh success for Unicorn, Continue the great work, and when everyone else gets to try these, trust me, you WILL be impressed.. GREAT WORK UNI LAB great work!

Posted by Warren Ackary at 08:37 on 28th January 2008

G''Day uniBoffin! I havent received mine as yet but look forward to them eagerly. One thing I have noticed (lloking at the catalogue) is they they resemble a thiner longer John Lowe barrels! A dart that I was very fond of in my early days. Would you agree they look similar or is that a coincidence?

Posted by Warren Ackary at 07:31 on 30th January 2008

G''Day uniBoffin.. well I finally got my Sigma Pro darts today and guess what? I only changed the Sigma stem to an ordinary slik stik! I cannot put them down for some reason, they fly true (with the large flights). I thought I would not do any good with them as I use front loaded darts as you know. Yes very lovely dart to throw but practice at home does not give true indication of the dart, tomorrow night I will know in match practice how they are and if todays play was anything to go by, then I will be suprised to find they wont be adaptable.. THANKS MATE!

Posted by FSK at 23:33 on 1st February 2008

As an update to last time... the new darts immediately felt comfortable and consistent. Crucially, the entry angle is right and 100% consistent every throw. Which, I guess, shows the aerodynamic optimisation which is the aim of UniLab. FYI the darts suggested were 25g type 3 (or C) Control, normal acrylic XL+ shafts and standard "P" polyflites - far from the most expensive set of darts I''ve ever thrown but doing well for me so far. I can see myself stepping up to a set of lighter John Part Hero darts (which is the recommendation if I change my level to "Pro") in the future as I start playing more and (hopefully) improving, but these are spot on so far.

Posted by Dickie Merkin at 20:40 on 11th December 2008

Is it me, or do the sigmas seem like an old Gameshot and Tommy Gibbons got together in a tungsten factory? I love throwing the old stuff, funny that those shapes are back. Bring back the Chimney Sweep or Gossamer flights!

Leave a comment
Please leave your details and message below.
Name 

Email (this will not be published) 

Message