Blob vB3 / dmvA

Jan 2010

Uploaded by Nico Saieh — Filed under: Featured ,Offices ,Selected , Belgium, dmvA

▼

Add this to My Bookmarks:

share by email

share by email

Architects: dmvA
Location: No Location / Mobile
Principal: Rini van Beek / XfactorAgencies
Project Team: David Driesen, Tom Verschueren, Thomas Denturck
General Contractor : AD&S Thomas Denturck
Constructional Engineer: AD&S
Built Area: 20 sqm
Project Year: 2009
Photographs: Rini van Beek, Mick Couwenbergh

The design dmvA made for the office of XfactorAgencies, as an extension to the house, was relentlessly rejected by local building regulations.

Used to working with limitations and blurring these boundaries at the same time, dmvA answered by designing a mobile unit, a blob.

plans & sections

As a mobile construction and holding a high dose of art, it skirted round the strict building codes.

AD&S, as a builder, worked 18 months on this project, resulting in this smooth looking egg. This space-egg houses all necessary items one could possibly need; bathroom, kitchen, lighting, a bed and several niches to store your stuff. The nose can be opened automatically and functions as a kind of porch.

You could easily use this mobile unit as an office, a guestroom, a reception, a garden-house, or whatever you want to.

The material used is polyester, sizes are like a big caravan and it can be moved to any place you like.

: plans & sections

Cite:
Saieh , Nico . "Blob vB3 / dmvA" 25 Jan 2010. ArchDaily. Accessed 10 Feb 2012. <http://www.archdaily.com/47298>

Comments (26)
Tweets (10)
Links to this entry (9)

word says:

18 months, really? That seems to be on the exorbitant side. Aside from that, I’d be more interested in understanding how strict building codes informed this as a product. Cool one person dwelling–what’s the height limit?

# January 25, 2010 at 13:58

jeremy says:

This project is really bad.
There is infinite flaws and shortfalls of the design.
So much more could be achieved with the resources that produced this.
Epic fail in my opinion.

# January 25, 2010 at 14:08

Tony says:

Didn’t Mork fly to Earth in that thing like 25 years ago?

# January 25, 2010 at 14:46

Jonjon says:

Hahahaha…you’ve got a great sense humour!

# January 26, 2010 at 05:58

Jeffry says:

It does not surprise me that this project has received the previous three posts. It is that good. 18 months, building codes, and resources matter to this project as much as the field it is cited in. The use of the waffle-esque grid to achieve the structural integrity of the form while doubly using it as modifiable storage (stove, sink, etc.) is very smart. No windows but this is more than compensated for by the uplifting nose. It is clear that the project wants to have wheels and replace the FEMA trailer… of course no one THINKS that they would want to live in one. (I heard you before you made your comment thou dissenter!)

# January 25, 2010 at 20:44

I can’t tell if you’re being serious?
How can time and resources not matter? Even if the project is being funded by an unlimited budget and has no deadline, good designers are supposed to have the ingenuity to use time and resources effectively. This project hasn’t, full stop.
First year architects could have come up with this in a one day workshop.

# January 26, 2010 at 11:23

Andrew says:

I applaud the effort. Of all the proto-type, mobile, pre-fab housing designs out there, this one actually functions. It keeps the rain out and the heat in, it has the services of a home inside. It actually fits on a flat bad and has the structural integrity to be airlifted into place. A field of these could look quite beautiful in a natural setting. I’d like to hear more about the budget, who subsidizes an 18 month construction schedule for something of this scale?

# January 26, 2010 at 00:15

Another Andrew says:

Functions? How could you possibly think this thing could function as a realistic dwelling. Beyond the fact of the constant feeling of being crammed into an egg, having to duck to take a shower and strategically crawl into “bed”, how about normal accommodations like the ability to sit, have a piece of furniture or two, have some natural light when the doors are closed and maybe even be able to see out. Does it function because the walls are plastered with cubby-holes that will only expose all the crap that you would normally like to store away? I don’t see how this thing could ever be seen as a viable living option. I think someone thought it would be cool to make an egg into a dwelling so they went with it and somehow got paid to do it.

# January 26, 2010 at 10:13

biboarchitect says:

Any Idea what is the material used in that one? is it wood also like unstudio? Can we have any info about that issue Archdaily?

# January 26, 2010 at 01:04

nonono says:

The material used is polyester.

# January 26, 2010 at 09:59

Modern Zen Architecture says:

I also applaud the effort. Let’s team up. Maybe have Japan or China mass produce and drop ship these in huge numbers to Haiti…

I’m actually being serious here. We need more of these “out of the box” ideas, and someone or some company, to take it to the next level.

It would be a great assignment for Archiect students to figure out a way to produce these in a grand scale, so that thw world will be ready, and well-prepared for the next natural (or man-made) disaster to affect us…

# January 26, 2010 at 04:23

mima says:

so what is this thing? and who’s using it? they say it can be used for any purpose!? i think they didn’t know what they were designing and constructing! they say: “…high dose of art”. i say: “waste of time, energy and money!”

# January 26, 2010 at 05:20

WPstudios says:

RT @highrockmedia The Blob: http://go2.vg/hmk7O #architecture #design

# January 26, 2010 at 14:08

Paul says:

might be a silly questions, but how do you move it?

# January 26, 2010 at 13:38

Henning says:

It seems non-efficient in every way.

# January 26, 2010 at 13:47

Chas says:

not to be totally negative but I also applaud the effort of this as a conceptual exercise.
as a practical final design I don’t like this at all. there is no function here at all. the kitchen is nothing more than cubby holes with a sink? is there a regriderator built into the floor? how bout a stove or cooktop? where do you sleep? is the floor cushioned? is a chair to much to ask for?

why no windows or do they feel that people will love to be surrounding by storage and bathed in orange light instead of daylight?

what does this do that you don’t get from a decent camper van?

as a theoretical exercise I like this but as a practical functional object I’d rather sleep in my car.

# January 26, 2010 at 14:25

frank says:

How is this thing mobile or practical?? Read their description, look at an Airstream trailor and then realize how much of a misguided exercise this is..

# January 26, 2010 at 16:33

Michael says:

So Marc Newson has moved into caravan design has he?

Seriously though, for once the local authorities got it right. I would have ‘relentlessly rejected’ it too.

I agree with Jeremy. This is exactly the sort of thing first year students come up with. The only difference is most of these things don’t get built.

# January 26, 2010 at 17:39

I apologise, my previous post is disresepctful to Marc Newson.
His work is much better than this.

# January 26, 2010 at 21:52

JJ says:

That is an interesting proposal. I won´t decredit the effort. Some say that is a too long timeline to develop such a not huge complicated design. Considering that there are no conventional materials involved, nor a conventional functionality analysis, I think that is an outstanding result of an 18 month of research and no-typical handcrafting activities. Maybe as a normal proptotype It needs some few improvements as well as every new design. The main idea for me is outstanding.

# January 28, 2010 at 10:20

Sasha says:

genius! Really, I like it

# January 29, 2010 at 15:16

that's what she says:

useless

# February 5, 2010 at 11:26

JS says:

How does it get water?
I think there is no faculty for water supply in this bob.

# February 8, 2010 at 00:52

Alexander Sandoval-Chen says:

The design is quite nice in my opinion, but the blob’s height is too short…way too short. Look at the first photo of this web page. The man in the photo is squatting and he’s already half as tall as the building. How can someone stand up in there?

# August 18, 2010 at 21:16

haley says:

Well I think it’s pretty cool. If I went to visit my family for a weekend, I would be thrilled to stay a night or two in this little space. It’s very modern looking, and the privacy would be great. Obviously it is hardly fit for an actual living space.. but for a temporary unit it’s great. Homeless people probably won’t be too snobby about having room for a nice chair or cushioned floors or a small shower, so by all means I think it’s very appropriate for natural disasters (especially if it is as transportable as they claim).

# December 13, 2010 at 16:58

TENDERS HOUSE says: