Dennis Cravens Reports on NI Week Cold Fusion Demo

It’s good to see a full length article published in Infinite Energy magazine about Dennis Cravens’ demonstration of his LENR powered brass sphere that he took to National Instruments’ NI Week conference in August. The article is written by Dennis Cravens himself, and his colleague Rod Gimpel.

One of the unique aspects of the Cravens demonstration (as opposed to those put on by Andrea Rossi and Defkalion recently) is that there is no input measurement to worry about — because there is no energy input into his sphere. The reaction is generated spontaneously inside the brass sphere which contains, “an activated carbon that holds metal alloy within its pores, some magnetic powder, some hydrogen storage material and some deuterium gas.”

To demonstrate the excess heat generated by the active sphere, it was placed in a bath of aluminum beads which was heated to a temperature of 80°C. A control brass sphere was placed in the bath, which remained at the same temperature as its surroundings, while the active sphere measured a consistent 4°C warmer than the other ball and the bath. The authors state that the sphere has been warmed by cold fusion for two and a half months. They only demonstrated it for five days at NI Week, and to show that it was not heated by a regular battery, Mr. Cravens cut open the sphere on the last day of the conference to show there was no battery inside.

The article contains some pictures and a section on a proposed theory. The authors report that they were surprised by the positive reception of the experiment, with a number of people asking about where this technology will lead. They conclude by writing, “We came away feeling that we had accomplished our real goal: To
make people think just perhaps cold fusion might be possible and real. That alone was worth the expense and effort to attend NI Week.”

  • Linda

    I want one. How much are they, and how do I order?

  • Roger Bird

    Does anyone have the link to the scientists who called the Wright Bros. con artists well past 1903? I need it.

  • Jim

    I have no idea what the cost to produce the spheres is, or the total heat density, but a fully passive module with a 3- 7 month life span would be a terrific supplemental heat source in most houses in the northern portions of the US.
    If it can be shown to have an overall cost less than the equivalent heat produced by oil and some method to control when they are activated, there is likely to be a significant market for these as ‘disposable’ room heater units even if the unit only heated a room by a degree or two constantly for several months.
    Much of the northern US needs heat pretty much 24/7 from October through April. Can’t the simplicity of this LENR type product be shown to be a cost effective breakthrough for some small amount of direct heating assuming it can be shown to not be hazardous if opened?

  • Herb Gillis

    If you just made the sphere bigger you could use it for space heating, and water heating (due to lower surface area to volume ratio). Why is Cravens not doing this? Or is he?
    And what about trying the same approach with the Ni + H system?
    Regards; HRG.

    • Job001

      Couldn’t be simpler. Some balls are hot and some are not.

      To keep ones house warm one takes one’s hot balls inside. When it’s hot, one takes one’s hot balls outside.

      Even skeptics can understand balls. Works for me. Market them!

    • Anonymole

      There may be a reason to have the bath set to 80C. The reaction may not occur until it gets hot enough to trigger. No one is gonna stick their hand in those aluminum pellets at 80C. At 40C the reaction may not trigger or if it does its so slight as to not be measurable outside of normal variance. It was a novelty demonstration but a useful one to pique the interests of others hopefully.

      • fortyniner

        Agreed – the heat input may well be essential. It is slightly regrettable that the article doesn’t go into this aspect in greater depth.

        I would like to see the double dewar device tested without any further heating after 80C has been reached in both the active and dummy ‘reactors’. If the thermally insulated active unit can sustain or even increase its temperature when external heating is discontinued, this might be a first step towards a useable CF power source using this system, or one derived from it.

    • Omega Z

      Last I read about this right after NI week was this was for demo purposes only.

      He plans on moving on to another project.

  • daniel maris

    I think Dennis missed a trick in not having a webcam broadcasting 24/7 during those five days.

  • Buck

    How many are needed to replace a coal fired power plant?

    Another step has been taken to trigger the demise of coal fired power plant.

    “Obama takes on coal with first-ever carbon limits”

    • fortyniner

      At about 1W each, somewhere between forty million and a hundred and forty million per power station! Dennis said that the brass spheres alone cost about $80 each.

      It’s good to see that his Patterson cell (type) demo has engaged some interest, but personally I wish he’d also gone ahead with his idea to use a higher output unit to drive a toy stirling engine – that would have turned some heads. I guess he doesn’t want to startle the horses at this stage, but he still seems to have a way to go before his Ford Model A can run on cold fusion power.

  • georgehants

    France to cut fossil fuels by 30% by 2030, president says

    • Roger Bird

      Little do they know how easy that is going to be.

  • Jimr is caring story on Brillouin

    • artefact
      • daniel maris

        I always found Brillouin intriguing. But now they seem to have gone up another level in terms of credibility.

        I hope we see some great things coming out of their labs v. soon.

        So, this is now a three horse race – at a minimum. That in itself lends credibility to the whole LENR phenomenon.

        • AlainCo

          I am as enthusiast as you seem, but we also have to be careful at the detailed level.

          The evidence on Brillouin are, that at ICCF17 Mr tanzella of SRI presented an article at ICCF17 and accepted to be named, on an article were some testing result were given.
          Clearly this mean that SRI does not judge it is a fraud, nor any kind of problematic usage of their name.
          However as the old ape of vortex remind, there is no detailed report (unlike Elforsk/e-cat test report, or Nelson/Defkalion quick report).
          anyway, money talks.
          Brillouin have something big enough to let SRI allow Brillouin to use their name. There is no evidence of the $3 million, not the $20 million, nor Sunrise Securities, nor Google employee presence.
          However when you own something big enough to get tolerance from SRI, you don’t play the fool by claiming $3million funding by a named New York fund and their attorneys.

          I confirmed that Nicolas Chauvin deny nothing… confirm nothing… It is not a lie, but… we will see.

          The big question for all 3 LENR companies is if they have a perfectly stable and controlled reaction.

          No doubt it works enough to attract investors, but no evidence it is already industrial.
          However there are some reason to be optimistic, and some to be cautious, and some to judge that real evidence are necessarily hidden at this stage.

      • Roger Bird

        Great article.

    • Jimr

      Sorry, should be CARRYING.

  • cliff

    This smells like competition! Competition leads to innovation and invention! I thought there’d be more and more groups cominig up with ways to do LENR. So, all those people who wanted Rossi’s “secret” to be revealed to the world should note the magic of competition.

    The “Rossi Effect” cannot be contained. Once something is shown to work, people just naturally jump on it and figure it out. That was the main problem with the Pons and Fleischmann experiment. Because it was hard to replicate it seemed to show that it did not work and discouraged people working on it. People didn’t find the parts that were both necessary but not sufficient by themselves to make it work. Now that’s all changed.

    Remember the airplane. Once the Wright brothers showed it could work, people all over the world figured it out, independently, in a few years.

  • Dennis

    It should be noted that the warm static spheres where only to demonstrate that a reaction was taking place and NOT intended as a commercially viable path. I did not and do not wish to sale anything related to it. That is to make sure that people do not accuse me of any fraud or scam intentions. Realize that the demo was based on work done and planned about a year and a half ago and is not indicative of current research.

    I do not plan on pursuing static spheres. Much greater thermal outputs can be achieved by electrically stimulating the material. However, that would have “confused” and complicated the demo. The goal was to keep it as simple as possible – even then, people wanted me to read the temp directly (resistance meter to thermistor) and not through LabView software. So basically only two resistance readings were needed to show the contents of the sphere where greater (by 4C) than the highly conductive metal bead bath.

    Yes, the reaction requires an elevated temperature (as well as a large volume for convection currents). Spheres at room temperature do give a thermal signal but it is very small and requires exacting measurements and a control temperature environment which would not be possible on an open convention floor.

    I wish I could get my car going, however I get either high COP at low absolute powers, or high powers at relatively low COP. It is hard to turn the corner and generate electricity at any significant levels. I have now turned my attention at a simple augmented electric heating unit.

    • Robyn Wyrick


      Thanks for posting this. Really interesting stuff.

      I’m curious about your statement, “I did not and do not wish to sale anything related to it.”

      If you’re not interested in pursuing a commercial direction, are you looking to publish a scientific paper? Or do you mean, you do not intend to market something regarding the spheres, but LENR generally still holds a commercial interest?

      All my best,


    • Esko Lyytinen


      You have the sphere in the bath of aluminum beads that quite effectively convey the thermal energy away.

      I would suggest you also to test the sphere to be situated in a very good thermal shielding, to see how high the temperature then would rise by itself, maybe even without originally rising it to 80 C. And if/when rising higher, the effect would be incresing by itself, maybe/probably.

      Maybe some precautions are needed, not to let it possibly go too high.


  • Felix Fervens

    Don’t understand why Cravens doesn’t simply put one of these balls in an inexpensive off-the-shelf calorimeter, wait until enough energy is released to rule out chemical reaction, publish his irrefutable results in a major journal (or raise hell on the net when they refuse to publish), and wait for his Nobel nomination.

    Nice touch would be to have several independent labs perform the exact same experiment along with him.

    Clearly i’m ignorant of some consideration preventing the above.

    • DennisC

      do not confuse a demo and lab work. I have had systems sitting at room temperature for months that remained warmer than their environment. Just realize that the warmer the material the larger the excess power levels. At room temp you would only see fractions of watts and have to wait for a few years. I have other things to do. Relise that this was just a demo, not the best embodiment of the system. Electrical stimulation can boost the net outputted power. But that is not good for a demo since they you have all that uncertainty about input power, hidden wires, ……
      This was just a demo with the fewest things required. Basically it came down to just two resistances for the two temps.

      PS… just try to find an “off the shelf calorimeter” that you can afford and that works at 80+C.

      • Dear Mr Craven,
        If higher temperature cause higher power for you balls, did you try to put them into a good insulated container (a thermos, a dewar) ?

        so the temperature get higher, and so the power ?

        risk is the runaway, but it would be an information.

  • Hermano Tobia

    Prof. Cravens,
    first of all thank you for sharing very interesting informations about your experiment.

    I would like to ask you a question raised from a discussion in an italian lenr-oriented blog: is it possible to arrange the setup of the experiment in order to have, after a pre-heating phase, the reaction going on in self-sustaining mode, without needing the bead bath ?

    Such a demonstration, lasting an adequate amount of time, would be bullet-proof for proving once and for all the reality of the LENR phenomenon.

    Thank you