Struggling with mid-air bridge infill
I'm having a rough time with my latest parts. I'm using a low infill setting and getting huge patches of bridge infill that wants to print mid-air. The unsupported edges of the infill sag and curl and subsequently cause the print to fail. I can put in a height modifier to add a layer of solid infill below the bridging infill, but I need several of these for the part. I can add modifier shapes, but the coordinate system for the shapes makes them super awkward to position precisely, and tedious to set up.
What are the best practices for avoiding bridging infill that turns 180 degrees in mid-air? The adaptive and support cubic aren't giving good results, and aren't really the best solution for this. Adding tons of modifiers to parts that are already print-ready is unwieldy. Increasing the infill adds a ton of print time, energy consumption, and plastic waste, for a part that doesn't need the strength.
things I'd love to see --
multiple height modifiers. should be able to click a plus and add a new range
bridge infill algorithm that extends to the nearest perimeter when below a sparsity threshold
bridge infill algorithm that detects unsupported 180 turns and draws a perimeter before drawing the infill
"replace bridge-infill with solid infill" settings option
allow me to change the origin for the coordinate positioning of shapes
RE: Struggling with mid-air bridge infill
things I'd love to see --
multiple height modifiers. should be able to click a plus and add a new range
That exists. Literally. Just click the plus sign next to a height range and add a new range.
RE:
things I'd love to see --
multiple height modifiers. should be able to click a plus and add a new range
That exists. Literally. Just click the plus sign next to a height range and add a new range.
LOL, thank you. How embarrassing, I just found it and came to report how dumb I am. I was looking in the sub-heading for the individual range settings -- clicking up the hierarchy to the Layers heading offered the interface options I was looking for. I still think some of my other suggestions would help avoid having to manually identify and fix these areas. But indeed, I'm wrong about the workflow issue here.