Nov 24
The Architectural Review’s Emerging Architecture Awards, sponsored by Ramboll and Austin-Smith:Lord, celebrates the best pieces of design by young architects from across the world. The door alone to this diamond merchant’s residence in Surat, India, was judged enough to make it one of the four prize winners this year
At 5.2m high and 1.7m wide, the door is comprised of 40 sections of 254mm-thick Burma teak. Each section is carved so that the door integrates 160 pulleys, 80 ball bearings, a wire-rope and a counter weight hidden within the single pivot.
Stacked one above the other in the closed position, each plank can then rotate by a simple push causing the door to reconfigure into a sinusoidal curve.
Despite only submitting the door for the competition, the accompanying 1700m² showpiece house features a number of similarly inventive components, including a light-emitting onyx wall, which also caught the judges attention.
Architects Matharoo Associates
Location Surat, India
Type of project Residentual Doorway
Project architects Gurjit Singh Matharoo, MC Gajjar, Chandan Suravarapu, Dilip Revar, Harita Salvi
Door contractors DP Traders
Photography credits Dinesh Mehta
Architectural Review AR Emerging Architecture 2009 Winner Australia China culture Education Europe Exhibition France gallery Germany house Iceland India Ireland Italy Japan Korea Landscape Leisure london Madrid Mexico MIPIM Future Projects Awards 2010 Museum Netherlands New York office Paris pavilion Portugal Residential restaurant Retail School Seoul Singapore Spain sustainability The Netherlands Tokyo Transport UK United Kingdom USA
WP Cumulus Flash tag cloud by Roy Tanck requires Flash Player 9 or better.
11 Comments
Mark Hewitt wrote:
This door by Matharoos Associates is something to behold… literally. A stunning piece of design that looks beautifully executed in the pictures. Only wish the Burma Teak was not such a sustainabilty issue.
Posted on Nov 25 2009 at 18:00
azhar wrote:
Beautiful!
Posted on Nov 28 2009 at 20:44
Socco wrote:
Thank you! I would now go on this blog every day!
Socco
Posted on Nov 29 2009 at 13:20
Vic B wrote:
Would love to see a Video of the door in action. May be an interview with the architects explaining the inner workings? Very very creative!
Posted on Nov 30 2009 at 21:09
Rory Toomey wrote:
“5.2m high and 1.7m wide… 40 sections of 254mm-thick Burma teak… 160 pulleys, 80 ball bearings, a wire-rope and a counter weight”
It is not just the use of teak that is unsustainable. This kind of wanton use of resources for the entry to a private residence, a 1700sqm private residence mind you, is just insane.
It is clearly a beautiful object and ingeniously executed but this kind of consumption cannot go on ad infinitum. Architects should be taking a leadership role in teaching the public how to use resources more wisely and effectively to preserve a future of beauty for more than just the super rich. Architectural awards for this kind of consumption belong in the 1980s, not in these more enlightened times. Sorry to be a downer. I appreciate this ‘door’ is brilliant design on one level.
Posted on Dec 02 2009 at 06:46
il Pelicano wrote:
Mr. Toomey, why would you want to suck all of the fun out of a purely joyful thing? You’re lecturing to people who love joyful things. I refuse to feel bad about loving something so beautiful and wasteful.
I also refuse to believe these times are any more enlightened than the 80s.
Posted on Dec 05 2009 at 07:12
Name hank wendt wrote:
Nice door design but rather repulsive by material choice and source–’captured’ plastic could function for appearance and performance and be ecologically artful. Neither morally nor ethically is it possible to extol “wasteful” aesthetically
this video of albatross abuse thusly portrays,
message from midway
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbqJ6FLfaJc
Posted on Dec 11 2009 at 20:00
BryanTree.org wrote:
I would love to see it made on a small scale to fit a 36*80″ opening and 42″ * 110″ would be grand enough for most.
Posted on Dec 13 2009 at 16:20
Nate wrote:
Beautiful design + egregious material choice = dereliction of duty as architect.
The architect’s purpose is to make good decisions at all levels. This is a perfect example of failure at the most fundamental level; wrapping irresponsibility in a cloak of aesthetics.
Posted on Dec 22 2009 at 03:16
MisheleName wrote:
I agree with Nate. Also, it is a residential door, not a residentual door. Check your spellcheck.
Posted on Dec 24 2009 at 02:02
ALI AROOJ BHATTY wrote:
It is not irresponsible on the Architect’s part alone, but on the awarding committee as well; AR Emerging award also share the burden of responsibility for looking into the matters at every level. How could an institute so mature even consider awarding a project like this when they have been declaring winning/highly commended projects like VILLAGE FAMILY HOUSES, Bangladesh and APARTMENT COMPLEX FOR MOTORBIKE, Japan where the essence of award is selection of material, culture, ecological constraints, spatial utilization, economy……?
Posted on Feb 05 2010 at 08:35
