Cura 4 vs. Lulzbot edition

So way over on the Ultimaker site, Cura is up to version 4.4.1 while we’re sitting back on 3.6.21. Is the only real difference the ability to customize the z-axis offset? If there are other differences, any idea when the big version hop will happen?

CuraLE is a fork of Ultimaker Cura with quite a few LulzBot-specific changes. CuraLE is still 32 bit while Ultimaker Cura is now 64 bit.

I believe the CuraLE changes are significant enough that merging them with the Ultimaker sources is a non-trivial task. It’s a shame that the two development groups can’t settle their differences and merge the two projects.

Cura supports “plug-ins”. There are a few LulzBot-specific plug-ins in Cura 3 that don’t exist for Cura 4. More… from what I can tell, it looks like Ultimaker (the author of Cura now works for Ultimaker) how the plug-in system works so I don’t think you can just copy the plug-ins and expect them to work.

But the most notable difference I found when trying to use Cura 4 is that the start G-code has several variables in it for things like:

  • Material soften temperature
  • Material wipe temperature
  • Bed level probe temperature

And there are others.

The ‘wipe’ temperature (just to pick one example) varies by material … so would you could hard-code those temps into the start g-code, you’d need to edit the start g-code anytime you change filament type.

Part of the reason other slicers don’t support this is because I am not aware of any other printer that has wiper-pads for the nozzles – so they don’t need it. But wiping the nozzles is needed because of the automatic bed leveling system (which is based on electrical conductivity … and that requires a clean metal-to-metal contact). Other printers historically did not have automatic bed leveling (although they do now … just not based on electrical contact).

I ran into an issue (bug) with support blockers in Cura 3.6 and had to use Cura 4.4 to get around it … and that’s when I learned that none of the start g-code variables worked and I had to hard-code everything.

So you can use other slicers. But when you copy the start g-code from Cura LE to wherever you want to use it… just make sure you check all those variables (they are always in curly braces {}) and be prepared to hard-code them with the actual values if the slicers doesn’t support the variables.

I just installed Ulitimaker Cura to see what it’s all about. It looks like you can add the start and end g-code for the printer, but like you said you’d have to add those variables specific to lulzbot cura. Is it worth the extra hassle or maybe even making a plugin to make this even easier?

By the way what settings did you use for the Printhead Settings?

Printhead and gantry height are based on collision possibility when printing multiple parts on the build plate “one at a time” instead of all-at-once. It will depend on the printer.

If the nozzle is all the way down printing layer #1 … measure from the print bed to the X-axis gantry (bars that hold the X-axis carriage) … that’s the gantry height. The idea being that if you printed multiple parts and one was sufficiently tall, then when the Y-axis attempts to move forward or backward, the bars might collide with the part.

The print-head settings for X min/max & Y min/max are based on the distance from the extruder nozzle to anything on the print head that might collide with a part (the cooling fan, the duct surrounding the print-head, etc.).

BTW, it does not use this information to be clever enough to route around a collision… it only uses the information to tell you that parts can’t be printed because it would result in a collision. But you can use this information to increase spacing between parts or choose not to build as many parts at the same time or not use “one-at-a-time” mode.

I actually introduce the concept as “polishing” when introducing new users to the printer. It really helps prevent users from let it go into wiping with a giant ball of PLA stuck to the tip.

I do personally own Simplify3D, but Cura is what we support at the makerspace (free is good). It sounds like I have to just hope the non-trivial task of updating will eventually be undertaken!

It would be great if BOTH versions of Cura could introduce a more intuitive material profile system, because what they have now seems confusing and buggy. Took me 3 tries to create a new material profile and make it “stick” (on both LulzBot AND Ultimaker), and even then the 3 LulzBot print profiles (fine/medium/fast) had to be re-created separately, despite my having based the new material off of an existing material. And sometimes when changing materials and adjusting individual settings, I won’t get prompted to keep/discard but instead they appear to get applied from the previous material to the new, and/or I won’t get an option to update existing profile from current settings, etc etc. On Ultimaker, one of the new materials I created actually loaded itself into the Ultimaker on-board menu (yay), though Cura will still bug me that it’s “unknown/unsupported”, whereas another material profile I created the exact same way refuses to load itself onboard the Ultimaker. Anyway, there seems to be room for improvement in both versions.

The differences you point out like wipe temperature would have to be part of an effort to merge both versions of Cura, but I’m not aware of any CuraLE specific changes that would preclude doing a merge. I’d like to believe that a merged version would be beneficial to both parties and especially the entire Cura user base.

Couldn’t this be something done by the user community since both are open source? Basically compile the requested changes and sent to Cura developers.

One correction. At least on the Mac LEcura is 64 bit - it works with Catalina.

I am kind of new to the Lulzbot Taz 6. I picked the printer up for very cheap. It works good. but I have fumbled on to this forum topic.
I have a couple of questions for this topic.

  1. Lulzbot is putting out the Workhorse and Mini. Do these printers use the that same old software I am using (Cura 3.6.21 and Marlin

2 Would anybody want to form a small group that work on getting the new Cura version to work with our printers?

  1. I know I bought an out of date printer, but I see that Lulzbot is still selling this same printer ($2,500), what does the new printer have over mine?

  2. Can my printer be upgraded to a new version of Marlin?

Thanks in advance for anyone who answers any of my questions.
Be Safe, Stay Healthy

@Coldani everything is upgradeable … it’s an “open source” printer.

The printers use the same Cura LulzBot Edition 3.6.21 software. The Marlin firmware is now 2.x.

I’m not sure if I could list all the changes, but a few highlights…

The Z-axis on the Workhorse is now belt-driven (on your printer it uses lead-screws).

The printhead on the Workhorse is different. Your printer has a print-head that has a direct-drive designed and 3D printed by LulzBot but the extruder head is an E3D Hexagon hot-end with a copper extruder nozzle. On the Workhorse, the printhead uses an E3D Titan Aerostruder – it’s a newer design. The Titan Aerostruder has a built-in direct drive system. It’s a bit better at dealing with multiple material types. Also the hardened-steel nozzle allows use of abrasive materials without wearing the nozzle.

You can swap out your nozzle … that’s no problem. LulzBot changed how the head mounts to the X-axis carriage … but they make an adapter that allows your printer to use any of the new print heads. So if you wanted to attach a new head that would be no problem.

LulzBot wrote a hardware plug-in for Cura that makes it a lot easier to deal with the LulzBot printers. Mostly this is about the start g-codes. These days you can find other printers on the market that have the “BL Touch” bed leveling system … but that’s kind of a new/recent thing. Most other printers have long required (and still do if they don’t upgrade to BL Touch) manually leveling the bed. LulzBot’s don’t have big bed-leveling screws on the corners. Instead they use the metal washers on each corner that use electrical continuity to detect when the nozzle touches each corner. But in order for this to work, the nozzle has to be clean. So they also have the wiper pad on the side of the bed. The start g-code on these printers has to warm the nozzle to the filament’s melting point, retract the filament a bit (to relieve pressure), then cool the nozzle to “wipe” temperature, scrub the nozzle, then cool it further to the “probe” temperature … then do the probing.

If you look at the start g-code in Cura (in the Preferences panel), you’ll see variables inserted in the g-code. The variables have curly braces around them. e.g. suppose the “probe” temp is 160. Instead of seeing the g-code to set the temp to 160, you’ll see g-code to set the temp to “{probe_temp}” (I’m not sure that name is correct, but you get the idea.) The print profile has the actual temperatures specified and the plug-in replaces all the variables with the correct values for that particular filament.

If you try to run the same g-code on Cura 4.6 (the latest version), it wont understand those variables. You would have to hard-code the values instead of using variables. BUT… if you change filament types, you have to manually edit your start g-code to use the new temperatures appropriate for that material. With the Cura LulzBot Edition, it’s all automatic because it understands the printer and variables.

The other slicers that I’ve looked at do seem to have a concept of variables … but unfortunately I’ve never been able to find out what the various names of these variables are.

Essentially Cura 4.x needs plug-ins to add these to support the printers.

For the most part I can do what I need in Cura 3.6. I had one particular print that needed some support added in certain areas, and support blockers in other areas and I couldn’t get it to work correctly in Cura 3.6 (I presume it was a bug) but the only way I could get around it was to use Cura 4.x. I hard-coded the variables in the g-code to make it work. When I finished that part, I went back to Cura 3.6 for everything else so I wouldn’t need to manually edit the g-code every time I change filament.

It would be great to get “current” … and as Fame3D (the new owners of LulzBot) are ramping things up after moving the company to North Dakota, now bow hampered by the COVID-19 shut-down … we’ll have to wait and see what’s in store for the future.

I haven’t looked into what degree of difficulty is needed to create hardware plug-ins for Cura. People also seem to be praising Prusa Slicer. Prusa Slicer is derived from Slic3r but, I’m hearing that their own edition is better than the standard Slic3r (and can be used for printers other than Prusa … much like Cura can be used for other printers besides Ultimaker).