You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This is just a feature request
I would vote for support for .STL, .STP and .3MW support as attachments
In som projects in PartDB I have 3D parts as well and want to document these together with electronic parts
As a starting point it could be nice to be able to select these 3 file types.
Next step could be a viewer (Manyfold can show STL files)
I also add 3D printer filement as this is very much a special type for the parts in my projects.
You can already create a custom attachment type. You can see it in the demo instance:
This issue seems to be a duplicate of #971
See also this discussions: #805
I implemented an 3D model viewer for Part-DB, with the latest commit:
You can just click onto an 3d model attachment, and it will open the viewer in a new tab.
Any common 3d model format should be supported, plus there is support for step and iges files.
Looks great so far. Tested it with stp and stl files. As I had my custom made file type Model (3D), should I update it or is this definition sufficient/correct?
Activity
mkne commentedon Aug 29, 2026
You can already create a custom attachment type. You can see it in the demo instance:

This issue seems to be a duplicate of #971
See also this discussions: #805
jbtronics commentedon Sep 26, 2026
I implemented an 3D model viewer for Part-DB, with the latest commit:
You can just click onto an 3d model attachment, and it will open the viewer in a new tab.
Any common 3d model format should be supported, plus there is support for step and iges files.
henrikkoch commentedon Sep 26, 2026
Fantastic news !! Thanks !!!!! Look forward to try this and use the feature when released
mkne commentedon Sep 28, 2026
Looks great so far. Tested it with stp and stl files. As I had my custom made file type Model (3D), should I update it or is this definition sufficient/correct?