“Regarding heat loss due to convection…” No, it isn’t an issue. Technically, a taper could calculated from 0 to maximum(thickness) that would describe your base system. The idea definitely has merit! But, the weight savings would be slight. Big Agness did something similar with their pad pockets, then tapering the baffles up to a maximum height. But, BA implemented things rather crudely resulting in no weight savings, in fact, a rather heavy bag. Continuing on with a rather difficult setup and the second rate down resulted in a sleeping bag that was not worth the carry. Using good 7D or 10D nylon shells and UL mesh baffles and light zippers with zipper baffle, a shoulder baffle and elastic tie off, hood, etc, you will end up with a nice bag. But, only by using the best materials all around will it be worth the carry. Soo, you can go through a LOT of effort in calculations, design, sewing & stuffing and not gain any advantage, overall … well, except a new bag, of course.
“…Does this seem like sound logic?” YES. What down does inside a baffle is something like a conversion from conduction to convection. Convection is nothing more than conduction, anyway…but usually reserved for gas/liquid energy flows where fluid dynamics can contend with the additional variables, so to speak. There is no such thing as convection except as a convenience/simplification for speaking/calculations.
“I am a little less concerned about weight loss than I am about optimizing the use of the materials.” Perhaps, only with mass production would any material resources be saved. None of the shell materials would be, and only around 5-10% of netting. So, materials would be a wash within 1/2 a buck or so. On a $400 bag, this is like .125%. Down would be about .25%. (As far as weight, I believe it would track about the same in percentage. As above we assume that a 0 fill amount to a max fill amount would define the base taper. Everything else would be the same, roughly speaking…heat transfers are not exactly linear, considering convection.)
OK, some offhand thoughts on utility. 1) I am not sure how to judge the utility of anything we take backpacking without defining a weight. Task accomplishment, weight, multitasking usefulness, redundancy(backup), … Weight is a critical component of all packing else we would all carry a 50lb (~22.5kg) base pack and be done with it. 2) For a quilt, I believe this concept is fairly wasted though I could be wrong. On cold nights, I tuck the edges of the quilt under me and bunch up the baffles over me. This results in a similar effect as a tapered baffle: tight at the bottom, loose at the top. 3) I personally would NOT spend extra dollars on a bag or quilt made with this feature 4) The approximately 3/4% of material savings would not justify the extra complexity of cutting and sewing these for a half to one ounce savings on a 40oz bag. It is much more difficult to cut/sew a curve than a straight line. (Ideally, it should be a doubled half curve.) 5) On the plus side, the design is ultra efficient. The next time I make a bag, I would like to incorporate this, however, I am getting old and somehow I think the equipment I have will likely last longer then me.