Comments on: The Fab Lab House by IAAC

By: Patty

Patty — Thu, 03 Mar 2011 14:16:51 +0000

To work in northeast ohio, we would need solar panels the size of a football field. How can the design be modified for low sun areas?

By: IAAC Student

IAAC Student — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 13:51:29 +0000

As a student of the IAAC and team member of this project, I would like to thank everyone for their criticism. Here are just a few comments that will hopefully place the Fab Lab House in a better light.

Yes, the form is unusual however the form plays a vital role in house’s solar performance. The design began as a sphere (please see principles of minimal surface areas). Using environmental simulation programs the sphere was deformed to achieve maximum solar gain for Madrid, Spain. If this house were to be built elsewhere in the world, the shape, size and curvature would be altered to suit the solar needs of that region.

Admittedly the design is not one that would be easily accepted by the masses. However, the intentions behind the Fab Lab House was not only to make a solar powered home but to also to test the boundaries of parametric architecture and digital fabrication. The IAAC considers this house to be the 1st of many prototypes, meaning to say we recognize that there are still improvements to be made and further studies to be conducted. We are continuing our research on the Fab Lab House and we look forward to facing all the challenges of producing such provocative architecture.

… and one side note, the bubbles on the roof are solar water heaters. Each bubble has black coils which are filled with water. There were purchased from a manufacturer for only $100 each and they proved to be very effective.

By: Aebe

Aebe — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 05:48:06 +0000

Ugly. While the designers are patting themselves on the back,have they given any though to what happens to plywood left out in the sun ?.Most good I high UV finishes are good only for a few years.And it is still throw a bag over it quick,Ugly. Unkind I know,but you would need a varience of the building code to put that up anywhere.

By: BjZ

BjZ — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 13:50:21 +0000

the interior is ok, but the exterior is yuck!

By: kristine

kristine — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 09:12:37 +0000

I think this is really cool!! I wouldn’t mind it in my neighborhood at all! I really like the shape of the rooms from the inside.

By: Michael Locke

Michael Locke — Sat, 24 Jul 2010 14:43:08 +0000

How would you like to have this oddity built on the lot next to your house? Not in my neighborhood.

By: Dano

Dano — Sat, 24 Jul 2010 06:03:31 +0000

Ugly ugly ugly ugly UGLY! Oh, and did I mention this is ungly? I would be embarrassed to have my name associated with that thing! Looks like lobsided pig made of childrens’ play blocks. YUK!

By: Miss Honey

Miss Honey — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 22:42:56 +0000

Nice try, but people won’t take this seriously. I don’t like the design at all, it ruins the hard work behind this project. I can’t even look at these pictures without feeling uncomfortable. I’m sorry, i can’t.

By: Matthew Daby

Matthew Daby — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 21:01:06 +0000

Loose the bubbles on the roof, switch to a contrasting window frame material, get rid of the “access bridge”, place it in the right context, and I think it’s quite nice. The interior spaces are bright and interesting and the “front steps” concept is inviting.
Bravo!

By: snarkitecht

snarkitecht — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 16:07:00 +0000

Cool digital form that looks like it was made by beavers. But its a student project and they probably learned a lot.

By: Brian

Brian — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 15:08:36 +0000

Can’t wait to use my “locally found machinery (laser cutting and/or milling machine)” to make my own ….. come on, really?!

By: Smack

Smack — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 13:42:18 +0000

Not quite the finished product but nevertheless wonderfuly wacky and laudable! Kind of like a clumsy caterpillar! Certainly challenges our entrenched pre-conceptions of house typologies. Nice drawings too, for some reason they remind me of Archigram’s drawings for Plug In City.

By: Jimw

Jimw — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 13:39:55 +0000

This is a text book case study illustrating the disconnect between designers’ abilities to take a seductive and intriguing computer model and attempting to execute it. The physical realization detracts far too much from the intent, goals, and purpose of the project.

While I appreciate the thought and intellectualization of the prototype, I’ve been around long enough that this is definately NOT a “very affordable housing solution”. While mass production might lower “per unit” costs, it will require a market demand to achieve lowering production costs. Unfortunately, I don’t fore see this appealing to the necessary numbers needed to turn it into “very affordable” and governments’ regulations will require too much alteration to assure a performance level before they would embark in a subsidization program.

However, I applaud the exercise, appreciate pushing the boundaries and the continued awareness this injects into the cultural mindset.

By: TW

TW — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 13:34:43 +0000

The problem with this kind of design is that it reinforces wrong perceptions that sustainable design is not for everyone.

Whilst I understand that this is an exhibition house, I suspect the quirky design will put people off and confirm their suspicions that you have to be a little bit eccentric to build with this type of sustainability.

A shame really.