Abstract:
A float, including rubber material for sensing liquid levels having a chemically resistant protective covering said float having greater resistance to attach from chemicals, such as hydrocarbons, acids, and chlorinated solvents, said float may be made to include magnets, guiding devices or sensors. Also disclosed is the method for manufacturing the float of this invention including the steps of milling acrylonitrile rubber, phenolic resin, sulfur and various additives in a Banbury mill and mixing at an elevated temperature below 250°, compression molding at up to 900 psi pressure between 250° and 350° F., cooling and filling a pre made protective skin container with the mixture, closing the container and heating the sealed container to bond the mixture to the container skin.

Description:
REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS  
       [0001]    This application claims benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application Serial No. 60/201,022 filed May 1, 2000, and International Application No. PCT/US01/13645 filed Apr. 28, 2001, and hereby claims the benefit of the embodiments therein and of the filing dates thereof. 
     
    
     
       FIELD OF THE INVENTION  
         [0002]    This invention is in the field of rubber-based floats for measuring liquid levels.  
         BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION  
         [0003]    Virtually every industry utilizes floats for liquid-level sensing in various applications, such as fuel tanks and liquid reservoirs, where the accurate and reliable measurement of the liquid level is important. Many floats are designed to include magnets, inserts, or guiding devices, all of which aid the float in performing its function. Generally, these guiding devices, inserts or magnets are molded within the float and actually become a part of a float assembly.  
           [0004]    Floats made of rubber materials, such as acrylonitrile rubber, are very popular because they are comparatively inexpensive, easy to manufacture into a variety of shapes and sizes and can be designed to meet a wide range of densities. Additionally, rubber-based floats are readily capable of being molded to include magnets, guiding devices, inserts, and the like, all of which aid the float in performing its function.  
           [0005]    In spite of the aforementioned benefits of rubber-based floats, there is one significant disadvantage to their use. Rubber-based floats have a tendency to fail or degrade in the presence of various chemicals, such as acids, certain hydrocarbons, chlorinated solvents, and alcohols. Failure or degradation of rubber-based floats in these environments is the result of either or both actual chemical attack of the rubber material or absorption of the chemical by the rubber-based float. Absorption can cause the float to fail by reason of an increase in weight or by fragmentation and/or cracking of the float.  
           [0006]    Today, many Federal, State and Municipal governments have offered financial incentives to individuals, businesses, and governmental agencies that utilize a fuel which is less polluting. One type of fuel which has gained popularity is an alcohol-gasoline blend. It has been found that use of such blends may lower a vehicle&#39;s emissions. With this key benefit in mind, many fuel manufacturers have spent considerable sums of money in developing and improving the alcohol-gasoline blends and have added alcohol-blended fuels to their product line.  
           [0007]    As mentioned earlier, rubber-based floats are subject to partial or complete failure when utilized in conjunction with alcohols or products that are blended with alcohols. In cases where a non-alcohol compatible rubber-based float is used in conjunction with an alcohol or alcohol-blended product, the rubber material either absorbs or is attacked by the alcohol. Ultimately such absorption or attack will lead to the failure of the rubber-based float. Consequently, rubber-based floats have limited utility in these type chemical environments.  
           [0008]    Exposure to other chemicals, such as chlorinated solvents, acids, and certain hydrocarbons, may also lead to the failure of a rubber-based float. Failure under these circumstances also occurs by attack or degradation of the float by the chemicals or by absorption by the rubber material of the chemical. Again, the inadvertent introduction of an incompatible float into a fuel tank or reservoir containing chlorinated solvents, certain hydrocarbons, or acids could lead to the failure of the rubber-based float, which in turn could result in serious, catastrophic, or possibly tragic consequences.  
           [0009]    To date, the only means known to overcome the chemical incompatibility problems of rubber-based floats was to simply avoid their use in certain chemical environments.  
           [0010]    As a result of the aforementioned problems in using rubber-based floats, it is the object of this invention to develop rubber-based floats which:  
           [0011]    can be easily molded into various sizes and shapes;  
           [0012]    can be molded to accept internal magnets, sensors, guiding devices, inserts, and the like;  
           [0013]    are relatively easy and inexpensive to manufacture;  
           [0014]    have use within a wide range of applications;  
           [0015]    are resistant to attack or absorption from most chemicals, including most chlorinated solvents, hydrocarbons, alcohols, and acids;  
           [0016]    are safe from catastrophic failure; and  
           [0017]    effectively prevents float deterioration.  
         BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION  
         [0018]    In light of the state of the art, the inventor has set out to produce a rubber float, particularly of closed cell foam acrylonitrile rubber which is resistant to attack from, or absorption of, most chemicals, such as chlorinated solvents, acids, alcohols, and certain hydrocarbons. Such a float must be relatively inexpensive to manufacture, able to be molded into various sizes and shapes, and capable of being molded to include magnets, inserts, guiding devices, and the like. The float must also have an application within a wide range of temperatures and pressures.  
           [0019]    These objects, and others, which will become apparent upon consideration of the following disclosure, are achieved by this invention, which briefly stated comprises the encapsulation of acrylonitrile rubber-based float material within a container, such as polyethylene or some other thermoplastic, wherein the two are bonded together to create a closed-cell acrylonitrile rubber float, which is completely encapsulated within a precisely dimensional protective plastic skin. A float of this invention is virtually impervious to attack from or the absorption of most chemicals, while at the same time maintaining its low cost, broad application, and flexibility of design. The inventive float is also capable of being molded to include magnets, inserts, guiding devices, and the like.  
       
    
    
     BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS  
       [0020]    This invention may be more clearly understood with the following detailed description and by reference to the drawings in which:  
         [0021]    [0021]FIG. 1, including FIGS. 1 a  and  1   b , are transverse sectional views of two common prior art rubber floats;  
         [0022]    [0022]FIG. 2, including FIGS. 2 a  and  2   b , are transverse sectional views of two floats similar to those of FIG. 1 modified in accordance with this invention;  
         [0023]    [0023]FIG. 3 is an enlarged fragmentary sectional view of the bond region between the acrylonitrile rubber core material and the thermoplastic protective skin;  
         [0024]    [0024]FIG. 4, including FIGS. 4 a  and  4   b ,  4   a  is a perspective view of a cylindrical float just prior to the encapsulation step, and FIG. 4 b  is a cross section of the float of FIG. 4 a ;  
         [0025]    [0025]FIG. 5 is a flow diagram for step  1 , stage 1 of the process of this invention;  
         [0026]    [0026]FIG. 6 is a flow diagram for step  1 , stage 2 of the process of this invention;  
         [0027]    [0027]FIG. 7 is a flow diagram of step  1 , stage 3 of the process of this invention; and  
         [0028]    [0028]FIG. 8 is a flow diagram of step  2  the encapsulation.  
     
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION  
       [0029]    Acrylonitrile rubber floats have been used for years for liquid level sensing; however, their use has been limited to those situations where the environment in which the float was utilized did not also include chemicals, which would either attack or be absorbed by the acrylonitrile rubber. Such attack or absorption could eventually result in the partial or complete failure of the float, and possibly culminate in human tragedy.  
         [0030]    The present invention is concerned with rubber-based floats, particularly an acrylonitrile rubber float, which is encapsulated in a protective skin, and method for making same. The skin protects the float from attack by various chemicals, which are aggressive towards and degrade acrylonitrile rubber, e.g., chlorinated solvents, acids, and certain hydrocarbons. In still other cases, the skin acts to eliminate absorption by the acrylonitrile rubber of various chemicals, such as alcohols, chlorinated solvents, acids, and certain hydrocarbons.  
         [0031]    The encapsulated acrylonitrile rubber float of this invention is manufactured in basically a two-step process. The first step is the manufacture of the acrylonitrile rubber float material or preform, with the second step being the encapsulation of the acrylonitrile rubber float material within a protective skin. Encapsulation does not alter the float&#39;s functionality or performance; however, it does allow the float to resist attack by or absorption of most other chemicals.  
       The Product  
       [0032]    [0032]FIG. 1 is comprised of FIGS. 1 a  and  1   b , both of which depict two types of commercially available prior art acrylonitrile rubber floats, neither of which is encapsulated. The floats of FIG. 1 are both comprised of acrylonitrile rubber material A. FIG. 1 a  reveals an insert l, and FIG. 1 b  reveals a carburetor pivot arm PA, both of which are imbedded within and held in place by the acrylonitrile rubber material.  
         [0033]    The above-mentioned inserts aid the float in performing its function. Floats, such as these, are subject to attack by or absorption of various chemicals, as shown later in Tables 1-8, resulting in change in weight, volume or durability of the float.  
         [0034]    [0034]FIG. 2, comprised of FIGS. 2 a  and  2   b , illustrates an encapsulated version of the same type floats of FIG. 1. FIG. 2 depicts the protective skin  11 , which encapsulates and protects the entire float. The protective skin does not alter the float&#39;s appearance or volume nor does it alter the float&#39;s functionality. This protective skin does eliminate all of the problems associated with the embodiment of FIGS. 1 a  and  1   b  as disclosed above.  
         [0035]    [0035]FIG. 2 b  reveals an insert  12  within acrylonitrile rubber material  13 , while FIG. 2 a  shows an encapsulated float with a carburetor pivot arm insert  14  within the acrylonitrile rubber material.  
         [0036]    A comparison of the floats of FIG. 1 with those of FIG. 2 reveals that the encapsulated floats are virtually identical to the non-encapsulated floats in both size, shape and weight, except that the encapsulated floats are more resistant to chemical attack or absorption, then a non-encapsulated float. A comparison of the performance of the non-encapsulated float and encapsulated floats is set forth in detail in Tables 1-8 below.  
         [0037]    Turning now to FIG. 3, which illustrates a closed cell acrylonitrile rubber core material  13  in bonding engagement  20  with the protective plastic skin  11 . Thermoplastics, such as high and low-density polyethylene or high and low-density polypropylene may be used to encapsulate the acrylonitrile rubber float material  13 .  
         [0038]    As can be seen in FIG. 3, the acrylonitrile rubber core material  13  and the thermoplastic  11  form a strong bond at their interface  20 . The bond is sufficiently strong to withstand attempts to separate the core material from the skin, and may be mechanical, thermal or chemical.  
         [0039]    Attempts to separate the thermoplastic skin  11  from the acrylonitrile rubber core material  13  by hand have been unsuccessful. The encapsulated float of this invention will actually tear before the bond  20  between the thermoplastic skin  11  and acrylonitrile rubber core  13  will break. The bond  20  between the acrylonitrile rubber core material  13  and the thermoplastic skin  11  results in a unitary float body.  
         [0040]    The skin  11  is approximately 0.02 to 0.06 of an inch thick; however, wall thickness can be designed to meet the demands of the environment. The skin also produces a precise weight change factor, which is designed into the float.  
         [0041]    [0041]FIG. 4 a  illustrates a cylindrical float just before the encapsulation step, wherein the acrylonitrile rubber core material  13  is placed into the preformed skin  11   c  with lid  11 L. FIG. 4 b  illustrates a cross section of FIG. 4 a  just prior to the bonding of the acrylonitrile rubber core material  13  to the protective skin  11  ( 11   c  and  11 L).  
         [0042]    The significance of the inventive float is that the acrylonitrile rubber core material  13  enters into complete bonding engagement at the interface  20  of the thermoplastic skin  11 , providing uniform protection of the core material  13  from the outside chemical environment.  
       The Process  
       [0043]    Turning now to step one, as shown in FIGS. 5, 6,  7 , and  8  of the manufacture of the acrylonitrile rubber-based float material. Step one is comprised of three separate stages:  
         [0044]    Stage 1, the Banbury mix  
         [0045]    Stage 2, the roller mix  
         [0046]    Stage 3, the compression stage.  
         [0047]    In both the Banbury stage, FIG. 5, and the roller mill stage, FIG. 6, below, the inventor has set forth a wide range of the additives to be mixed. This represents the broad range of acrylonitrile rubber formulations presently utilized within the industry. The exact formulation will vary with the consumer needs and specifications.  
         [0048]    The preferred embodiment, which is the most common of these formulations, is set forth in parenthesis beside each ingredient additive range.  
       I  
       [0049]    The first stage, or Banbury mix, FIG. 5, occurs as follows: Blending in a Banbury Mill or the like, by weight, add between 30.0% to 55.0% (37.04% to 37.50%) acrylonitrile rubber, 0.5% to 4.2% (0.84% to 1.01%) zinc oxide, 1.0% to 15.0% (1.67% to 2.02%) stearic acid, 0.1% to 2.0% (0.21 to 0.51%) retarder SAX salicylic acid (0-hydroxybenzoic acid) C 6 H 4  (OH)(COOH), 3.0% to 22.0% (14.14% to 15.83%) mistron vapor Mg 3 Si4010 (OH) 2 , 0.3% to 2.75% (0.83% to 1.35%) Coumarone Indene Resin absorbed on Synthetic Calcium Silicate (72% Cumar P-25), and 8.0% to 15.0% (10.10% to 10.83%) sulfur, while maintaining the temperature of the mixture to below 250° F.  
         [0050]    The inventor has determined that, for best results, the addition of the compounds in the Banbury stage should occur in the sequence set forth above.  
         [0051]    Blending is completed after a period of 60 to 180 minutes or when the mixture turns a pale yellow-brown in color.  
         [0052]    Upon completion of the Banbury mixture stage, confirm that the Shore A hardness of the mixture is between 15-90. For the preferred embodiment, the Shore A hardness is between 65 and 75.  
       II  
       [0053]    Transfer the completed stage one mixture to a suitably sized roller mill to begin stage 2, as shown in FIG. 6. To the stage one mixture, add by weight, between 12.0% to 40.0% (22.22% to 22.50%) phenolic resin (C 6 H 6 O.CH 2 O)X, 2.5% to 10.0% (3.33% to 4.03%) carbon black, 0.25% to 1.5% (0.63% to 0.84%) Altax C 14 H 8 N 2 S   4 , 1.75% to 15% (2.50% to 2.70%) epoxy-resin, and finally 1.0% to 5.0% (3.33% to 4.04%) blowing agent (NO) 2 C 5 H 10 N 4 , while controlling the temperature of the mixture throughout this stage to less than 200° F. The inventor has determined that for best results, the addition of compounds in roller mix stage should also occur in the sequence listed above.  
         [0054]    Mixing is completed in approximately 15 to 50 minutes or when the mixture is uniform and turns to a black, smooth sheet.  
         [0055]    A Shore A hardness test is conducted to confirm hardness of between 15 and 90. For the preferred embodiment, the Shore A hardness is between 65 and 75.  
       III  
       [0056]    The compression stage of FIG. 6 is the third and final stage of step  1 . The pre-cured acrylonitrile rubber-based mixture of completed step  2  is placed into a conventional compression tool where, depending upon the formation, the pressure is increased to between 20-900 lbs/cubic inch for between 5 to 45 minutes at a temperature of between 200° F. to 350° F., FIG. 7. In the preferred embodiment, the pressure in this stage is between 350 and 410 lbs/cubic inch for 10 to 18 minutes at a temperature of between 265° F. and 275° F.  
         [0057]    The acrylonitrile rubber foam is removed from the compression tool and allowed to cool. Cooling may be achieved in air or by any convention manner.  
         [0058]    After the acrylonitrile rubber foam has cooled, it is inspected for visual defects in preparation for the encapsulation step. The foam material is tested again to confirm that its Shore A hardness is between 15-90. For the preferred embodiment, the Shore A hardness is between 65 and 75.  
         [0059]    The acrylonitrile rubber foam material is weighed and trimmed of any excess material, if necessary, to meet the desired unit shape and weight. Stage Three and Step One are now complete.  
       IV  
       [0060]    The acrylonitrile rubber foam is now ready for the encapsulation step FIG. 8. However, prior to the encapsulation step, any magnets, inserts, guides, or the like are placed into the acrylonitrile rubber foam by conventional means, such as drilling an opening and inserting the inset in place.  
         [0061]    Thermoplastic containers, which have been pre-molded to meet the desired size and shape specifications, are visually inspected for defects. The inventor has determined that both high and low-density polyethylene, and high and low-density polypropylene, bond equally as well with the acrylonitrile rubber core material. The pre-molded thermoplastic is in a container shape and is preferably formed to have only one open end or lid and thus only one seam, although multi-seam containers may be used.  
         [0062]    The inventor has determined that the physical characteristics of the encapsulation material, e.g., wall thickness, is more easily controlled when it is premolded. By contrast, dipping, painting or spraying the acrylonitrile rubber foam material with the encapsulation material would likely result in a non-uniform skin, and thus an improper float.  
         [0063]    The desired weight of pre-cured acrylonitrile rubber foam unit, taking into account the container and lid weight, is placed into the thermoplastic container, to fill the space. The container lid is loosely placed onto the container, to close the container and meet final products dimensional requirements. Thereafter, the plastic container, with acrylonitrile rubber core material and/or insert, are placed into a finish mold tool. The finish mold tool is designed to conform to the size and shape of the thermoplastic container. The inventor has, for purposes of this application, elected to describe the encapsulation process wherein high-density polyethylene is utilized as the encapsulation material.  
         [0064]    Thereafter, the finish mold tool is, depending on formulation, heated by any conventional means to between 250° F. to 550° F. for between 20 to 180 minutes to allow the acrylonitrile rubber material to expand into intimate contact with the entire interior surface of the thermoplastic container and enter into bonding engagement thereto. During this step, the container and lid are also bonded to seal the float.  
         [0065]    For the preferred embodiment, the finish mold tool is heated to between 250° F. to 500° F. for between 30 to 70 minutes. The temperature and time may vary where high-density polyethylene, or high and low-density polypropylene, are used as the encapsulation material. After the allotted time period, the finished mold tool is allowed to cool by any conventional means until it is ambient temperature. Upon completion of this step, the acrylonitrile rubber foam material with insert, if any, is bonded to and encapsulated within the protective polyethylene skin, FIGS. 2 and 3. The resultant float is now a unitary body.  
         [0066]    Table 1 is a summary of results of a Shore A hardness test comparing the acrylonitrile rubber encapsulated float of the invention (denoted U-2000) with two non-encapsulated, but commercially available acrylonitrile rubber floats denoted “A” and “B” after a methanol soak. The three floats were submerged in a 100% methanol bath and allowed to soak for 28 days at a temperature of between about 64° to 78° F.  
         [0067]    After removal from the methanol soak each day, the floats were each given identical shore hardness tests and then returned to the bath.  
         [0068]    As shown in Table 1, the acrylonitrile rubber float of this invention did not lose any of its Shore A hardness, while the two competitive but non-encapsulated acrylonitrile rubber floats lost 17.5 points of hardness (A float) and 11.5 points of hardness (B float), respectively.  
         [0069]    The conclusion drawn from this test is that the encapsulated float of this invention did not absorb any methanol and thus lose hardness, as compared with non-encapsulated floats.  
                                                           TABLE 1                           Methanol Soak - Shore A Hardness       Test Parameter - Temperature 64-78 Deg. F.,       Commercial Grade Methanol (CAS 67-56-1)                    A   B   U-2000                            Start   94.5   95.5   93           Day 1   92   94.5   93           Day 2   89   93   93           Day 3   87   93   93           Day 4   87   92   93           Day 8   86   92   93           Day 9   86   90   93           Day 10   85   90   93           Day 14   82   87   93           Day 17   80   87   93           Day 22   78   85   93           Day 28   77   84   93                      
 
         [0070]    Turning now to Table 2, which presents the results of a methanol immersion test comparing the same three types of floats, as utilized in Table 1. Here, the three floats were again immersed into a 100% methanol bath for 28 days. This test measured the amount of methanol absorbed by each float as an increase in each float&#39;s weight. Each day the floats were removed from the methanol bath, weighed and returned to the methanol bath.  
         [0071]    The encapsulated acrylonitrile rubber float of this invention exhibited only 0.01 grams weight gain after 28 days, while the two non-encapsulated, acrylonitrile rubber floats exhibited a significantly higher increase in weight. Acrylonitrile rubber float A increased 8.20 grams in weight after 28 days, while the B acrylonitrile rubber float increased 9.62 grams in weight after 28 days.  
         [0072]    The conclusion drawn from this test is that the encapsulated float of this invention did not absorb significant amounts of methanol over the test period, whereas non-encapsulated floats did absorb a substantial amount of methanol.  
         [0073]    Applicant wishes to point out that in regards to Tables 2-7, applicant was required to remove excess liquid from the floats by hand blotting prior to weighing. Hand blotting was used for measurement purposes during testing and did not result in completely dry samples.  
                                                           TABLE 2                           Methanol Immersion Weight Change (gms) Testing       Temperature 64-78 Deg. F.       Commercial Grade Methanol (CAS 67-56-1)                    A   B   U-2000                            Start   48.48   53.96   8.02           Day 1   49.03   54.33   8.03           Day 2   49.55   54.83   8.02           Day 3   49.88   55.43   8.02           Day 4   50.20   55.96   8.08           Day 8   51.02   57.58   8.08           Day 9   51.60   57.85   8.09           Day 10   51.86   58.10   8.05           Day 11   51.93   58.36   8.04           Day 14   52.81   59.28   8.03           Day 17   53.73   60.08   8.06           Day 22   55.09   61.41   8.04           Day 28   56.28   62.58   8.03                      
 
         [0074]    Referring now to Table 3, which sets forth the results of the 1,1,1 Trichloroethane immersion test. The same three types of floats, as described in Table 1, were immersed in 100% 1,1,1 trichloroethane at a temperature of between 150° F. to 170° F. The test measured the amount of 1,1,1 trichloroethane absorbed by each float as an increase in each float&#39;s weight. Each day the floats were removed from the bath and weighted then returned to the bath.  
         [0075]    The acrylonitrile rubber float of this invention (U-2000) increased only 0.02 grams in weight over a 24-hour period, while acrylonitrile rubber float A increased 30.83 grams in weight after only one hour, and acrylonitrile rubber float B increased 29.32 grams weight after only one hour. Both the A and the B floats were partially dissolved, severely swollen, and severely cracked after only one hour of immersion in the 1,1,1 trichloroethane. The conclusion from this test is that a non-encapsulated float would fail in a short period of time in this chlorinated solvent, whereas the inventive float would not.  
                                                           TABLE 3                           1,1,1,Trichloroethane Absorption       Immersion Test (gms) - Hot                    A   B   U-2000                            Start   48.22   54.05   8.17           Hour 1   79.05   83.37   8.21           Hour 8   *   *   8.2           Hour 24   *   *   8.19                                  
 
         [0076]    Table 4 sets forth the results of an immersion test in an alcohol/gasoline blend, whereby two commercially available acrylonitrile rubber-based floats, A and C as well as the encapsulated acrylonitrile rubber float (U-2000) of this invention were immersed in a blend of 15% methanol and 85% regular unleaded commercially available gasoline by weight. The immersion test was conducted over 28 days at a temperature of between 68° to 77° F. The test measured the amount of absorption of the methanol/gasoline blend by each float as an increase in weight of each float. Each day the floats were removed from the bath, weighed and then returned to the bath.  
         [0077]    The encapsulated acrylonitrile rubber float increased 0.01 grams in weight after 28 days, while acrylonitrile rubber float A increased 0.8 grams in weight, and acrylonitrile rubber float C increased 0.9 grams in weight.  
         [0078]    The conclusion drawn from this test is that the encapsulated float of this invention did not absorb significant amounts of the methanol/gasoline mixture over the test period, whereas non-encapsulated floats did absorb a substantial amount of the methanol/gasoline mixture.  
                                                           TABLE 4                           15% Methanol/85% Unleaded Gasoline by Volume       Immersion Weight Change Test (gms)       Methanol - (CAS 67-56-1)       Gasoline (CAS 8006-61-9)       Ambient 68-77 Deg F.                    A   C   U-2000                            Start   48.0   48.2   8.11            7 Days   48.6   48.8   8.13           12 Days   48.7   48.8   8.14           21 Days   48.8   48.9   8.1           28 Days   48.8   49.1   8.12                      
 
         [0079]    Table 5 describes the results of an ethanol immersion test wherein the same three types of floats as described in Table 4 were submerged in 100% ethanol for 28 days. The temperature during the 28-day test was between 64° and 78° F. The test measured the amount of ethanol absorbed by each float as an increase in weight of each float. Each day the floats were removed from the bath, weighed and returned to the bath.  
         [0080]    Both the A acrylonitrile rubber float and the C acrylonitrile rubber float increased 0.2 grams in weight, while the encapsulated acrylonitrile rubber float of this invention increased only 0.01 grams in weight.  
         [0081]    The conclusion drawn from this test is that the encapsulated float of this invention did not absorb significant amounts of ethanol over the test period, whereas non-encapsulated floats did absorb a substantial amount of ethanol.  
                                                           TABLE 5                           100% Ethanol Immersion Testing Weight Change (gms)       Temperature 64-78 Deg. F.       CAS 64-17-5                    A   C   U-2000                            Start   48.3   48.0   8.24           Day 7   48.5   48.4   8.27           Day 12   48.5   48.4   8.25           Day 21   48.5   48.4   8.26           Day 28   48.5   48.6   8.25                      
 
         [0082]    Turning to Table 6, which summarizes the results of a float immersion test in a 15% ethanol and 85% commercially available Regular Unleaded gasoline blend. The test measured the absorption of the ethanol gasoline blend by each float as an increase in the weight of each float over a 28-day period. This test was conducted at temperatures ranging from 64° to 78° F. The same three types of floats, as disclosed in Table 4, were utilized. Each day the floats were removed from the bath, weighed and returned to the bath.  
         [0083]    The A non-encapsulated acrylonitrile rubber float increased 0.5 grams and the C non-encapsulated acrylonitrile rubber float increased 0.6 grams in 28 days, while the encapsulated acrylonitrile rubber float of this invention (U-2000) only increased 0.01 grams during the same time period.  
         [0084]    The conclusion drawn from this test is that the encapsulated float of this invention did not absorb significant amounts of the ethanol/gasoline mixture over the test period, whereas non-encapsulated floats did absorb a substantial amount of the ethanol/gasoline mixture.  
                                                           TABLE 6                           15% Ethanol/85% Unleaded Gasoline by Volume       Immersion Weight Change Test (gms)       Methanol- (CAS 64-15-5)       Gasoline (CAS 8006-61-9)       Ambient 68-77 Deg. F.                    A   C   U-2000                            Start   48.4   48.1   8.17            7 Days   48.6   48.5   8.2           12 Days   48.6   48.5   8.19           21 Days   48.8   48.6   8.19           28 Days   48.9   48.7   8.18                      
 
         [0085]    Referring now to Table 7, which sets forth the results of the diesel fuel immersion test. The same three types of floats, as described in Table 4, were immersed in commercially available diesel fuel. The test was conducted at temperatures of between 64° and 78° F. for 28 days and measured the amount of diesel fuel absorbed as an increase in weight of each float. Each day the floats were removed from the bath, weighed and returned to the bath. Both the A and C acrylonitrile rubber floats increased 0.7 grams in weight while the encapsulated acrylonitrile rubber float of this invention increased 0.07 grams in weight during the 28-day test.  
         [0086]    The conclusion drawn from this test is that the encapsulated float of this invention did not absorb significant amounts of diesel fuel over the test period, whereas non-encapsulated floats did absorb a significant amount of diesel fuel.  
                                                           TABLE 7                           Diesel Fuel Immersion Weight Change (gms) Test       Diesel (Ref. CAS 544-76-3)       Ambient Temperature 64-78 Deg. F.                    A   C   U-2000                            Start   47.5   48.3   8.11            7 Days   48.2   49.0   8.21           12 Days   48.2   49.0   8.18           21 Days   48.2   49.0   8.22           28 Days   48.2   49.0   8.19                      
 
         [0087]    Table 8 sets forth the affects of a nitric acid and ammonium bifluoride mixture on encapsulated and non-encapsulated acrylonitrile rubber floats. Four separate floats were introduced into a nitric acid mixture comprised of 250 ml of 70% commercial grade nitric acid and 27 grams ammonium bifluoride. Two of the floats were commercially available non-encapsulated acrylonitrile rubber floats, denoted A and C. The other remaining floats were the encapsulated acrylonitrile rubber float of this invention, and a commercially available hollow, stainless steel float. Each float was allowed to float upon the nitric acid mixture, thus directly exposing the bottom and portions of the side of each float to the acid mixture.  
                                                                   TABLE 8                           Acid Test       Mixture of Nitric Acid (CAS 7697-37-2) and       Ammonium Bifluoride (CAS 1341-49-7)       Mixed 250 ml 70% Commercial Grade Nitric Acid       and 27 grams Ammonium Bifluoride Ambient Temperature,       Closed container, Sample Weights in Grams       Note - Test Materials Floated on Surface of Mixture,        Remaining Surfaces of Materials Exposed to Vapor                    A   C   U-2000   Stainless Steel*                            Start   0.4   2.96   8.2   8.19            48 hours   0.28   2.42   8.21   8.19            96 hours   0.2   2.21   8.2   8.18           168 hours   **   1.18   8.22   8.19           336 hours   **   **   8.22   8.17           504 hours   **   **   8.22   8.16           672 hours   **   **   8.21   8.16                                              
 
         [0088]    After 336 hours, both of the non-encapsulated acrylonitrile rubber floats, A and C, were destroyed. The stainless steel float weighted slightly less (0.03 grams) after 672 hours; however, there were visual signs of etching of the stainless steel. The encapsulated acrylonitrile rubber float (U-2000) exhibited no weight loss after 672 hours.  
         [0089]    The conclusion from this test is that the encapsulated float and the stainless steel float are able to withstand immersion in a nitric acid bath, whereas the non-encapsulated floats are incapable of use in this type of environment.  
         [0090]    The above-described embodiments of the present invention are merely descriptive of its principles and are not to be considered limiting. The scope of the invention instead shall be determined from the scope of any claims in a corresponding non-provisional application, including their equivalents.  
       List of Tables  
       [0091]    Table 1 is a summary of results for Shore A hardness after a methanol soak;  
         [0092]    Table 2 is a summary of absorption after a methanol immersion;  
         [0093]    Table 3 is a summary of absorption after a 1,1,1 trichloroethane immersion;  
         [0094]    Table 4 is a summary of absorption results after immersion in a 15% methanol, 85% regular unleaded gasoline mixture;  
         [0095]    Table 5 is a summary of absorption results after an ethanol immersion;  
         [0096]    Table 6 is a summary of absorption results after immersion in a 15% ethanol, 85% regular unleaded gasoline mixture;  
         [0097]    Table 7 is a summary of absorption results after a diesel fuel immersion.  
         [0098]    Table 8 is a summary of float degradation after a nitric acid/ammonium bifluoride mixture soak.  
       List of Tables  
       [0099]    Table 1 is a summary of results for Shore A hardness after a methanol soak;  
         [0100]    Table 2 is a summary of absorption after a methanol immersion;  
         [0101]    Table 3 is a summary of absorption after a 1,1,1 trichloroethane immersion;  
         [0102]    Table 4 is a summary of absorption results after immersion in a 15% methanol, 85% regular unleaded gasoline mixture;  
         [0103]    Table 5 is a summary of absorption results after an ethanol immersion;  
         [0104]    Table 6 is a summary of absorption results after immersion in a 15% ethanol, 85% regular unleaded gasoline mixture;  
         [0105]    Table 7 is a summary of absorption results after a diesel fuel immersion.  
         [0106]    Table 8 is a summary of float degradation after a nitric acid/ammonium bifluoride mixture soak.