Hi all!
Are there any plans to add a new feature?
Very interesting Gradient Infill!
More information on this link.
1 Like
I haven’t watched the video yet, but Adaptive Cubic works well, and there is also Lightning.
1 Like
Just got recommend to watch this on youtube today, would like this feature added as well
I agree. at the very least could Bambu copy the gradual infill feature from Cura? that is very slick. it allows for very low density in the main body of the print but then doubles the infill as it gets closer to a top surface. it can even be doubled again and again and you can specify how many layers thick each step of increased infill. this is great for very large bodies that do not need a lot of infill to stay ridged but need a lot of infill to ensure a good top surface.
infill - xx
gradual infill steps - xx
grad in step height - xx
I would suggest that gradient infills would be valuable in the other direction as well. Objects could be printed with a more flexible feel on the outside, but built with greater density as you move into the inner layers of an objects. For example, this could be used in the printing of tangible toys, drink coasters or human prosthesis. Just my 2 cents.
1 Like
One more vote for something like this. Something with parameters would be nice. This is theoretically the ultimate infill, the one to rule them all. Please make this happen!
I prefer to use the rectilinear or triangular infill for STRONG parts.
For something light and complex I often use the Gyroid infill.
But where I already have strong enough walls and won’t really much on the inside lightning is not just fast but also, in most cases, more than good enough…
A gradient infill is a neat thing to have but I already wonder if I (just me) would actually have enough use for it.
Theory and result look both promising and great but to what sort of models would this translate to be most beneficial ?
What I would really love to see one day is a fully customisable infill.
A bit like how we can already create custom tree supports, just with a better algorithm and ease of use.
Let me try to explain with some lame examples:
You want to print a rather large statue or such, meaning the outside matters and it probably won’t have to endure too much stress.
Things like joints areas for limbs can often be a weak point.
And depending on the orientation, like an arm stretched horizontally, some areas just require more infill to come out great.
On the other hand, something like complex structural model might need a lot of strength and support in one area but next to nothing in other areas.
Or just take the nightmare shape: a sphere with a perfect outside LOL
In the most basic form such intelligent infill would create only what is required and in the selected infill pattern.
But then the user can switch the model transparent to highlight the infill and select areas where the infill shall be more or even solid.
Like by painting over the area in question.
Ideally the user would be able to ‘paint’ additional or just custom supports on the inside of the model.
One can always dream I guess, same for getting a proper non-planar slicing option included one day…
It’s about approaching theoretical maximum strength to weight ratio and smoothing out the transition between walls and infills. It’s literally how bones structures converged after millions of years of evolution.
1 Like
thats so cool i wanna try that
I printed some rudder pedals but have already cracked them slightly for lack of this. I don’t want or need heavy infill all across the parts since it’s slow and wasteful. I do want heavy infill around the bolts that gradually lightens up the farther away.
I’d been thinking about the problem before I reprint them but came up with a workaround - I’ll make concentric rings around the bolt holes components and pull them all in to Studio like I was doing a lightbox or other multicolor part. Instead of color, though, I’ll set increasing infill in rings closer to the bolts.
Not perfect as I’ll have walls between regions inside the model, but it should do what I need even if cumbersome.
But I vote for gradient infill as well.
1 Like
Did you ever consider cheating for your rudder parts ?
When I needed some wind turbine blades of the larger size I had similar issues…
Had to be strong for the mounts but shall be light between them - over a distance of about 60cm and printed in multiple parts to join…
Wasn’t ready to accept having to use 3 rolls per blade…
Beats the purpose of light weight wind turbine a bit…
Here’s how I ‘fixed’ it:
Cut the mount part from the model so I could print it strong enough, add a grove to glue the vase mode parts for the blade in place.
To provide a better bond later I also added some mushroom heads on the mount bit.
I also added a small hole in the mount plates…
Once assembled and the glue was set I filled the thing with expanda foam from the hardware store…
I used the extra strong, extra light and low pressure variant advertised to be ideal for fitting doors and windows where the normal foam would cause too much pressure.
Not sure about what a difference it makes to the dirt cheap stuff but the resulting foam was surprisingly strong.
Might be worth a try if being rather buoyant wouldn’t be a problem…
1 Like
No problems with buoyancy - at least not until the floods come here 
What I was shooting for with extruding different parts of the pedals with different infill levels was to still end up with a single piece without needing glue. Your post got me thinking I should extrude in some shapes that can’t be separated because the overall part might be weaker at the joints between regions since it would just be wall on wall adhesion holding it together and that could be a weak spot even with arachne walls and such.
As luck would have it I just got a can of spray foam yesterday for some other house things so might give it a try. Thanks!
Don’t worry too much about those joints 
Add some PVC primer and glue and they will stay in place.
Once the foam is set nothing will move unless it breaks.