15–0.3 m. As noted above, one can expect that from the beginning of spot spreading, the surface tension regime is operative. The change of the film size with time in the absence of wind is determined by the balance of viscosity and surface tension. The leading edge position and the spreading rate of SF as a function of time t are written as ( Fay, 1969, Hoult, AZD6244 1972, Foda and Cox, 1980 and Phillips, 1997) equation(1) Rt=KS1/2μρ1/4t3/4, equation(2) usp0t=∂R∂t=34KS1/2μρ−1/4t−1/4, where μ – kinematic viscosity of water, K – experimental constant that can range in magnitude from 0.665 to 1.52 ( Dussaud

& Troian 1998). It was shown by Camp & Berg (1987), Dussaud & Troian (1998) and Foda & Cox (1980) that expression (1) gives a good description of the SF spreading of various substances under laboratory conditions. The values of usp   shown in Figure 6 and Figure 7 were averaged over the duration of each measurement. To compare our data with model

(2) the value of usp0¯ was calculated in the temporal interval from 200 sec to 3600 sec. Let us now consider the spreading of a vegetable oil film on the sea surface at a weak wind speed. As can be seen from Figure 4, the spreading selleck products of slicks at weak wind speeds (symbols (°) in Figure 4) in fact obeys the law R(t) ∼ t3/4 and S(t) ∼ t3/2 over a significant time interval. The essential difference between the model and experimental data is observed after sufficiently long times. As indicated in Boniewicz-Szmyt & Pogorzelski (2008) surfactant adsorption at the air-water and oil-water interfaces could be a possible mechanism for the

difference between lens expansion rates of the field data and the classical tension-gradient-driven spreading theory. Under calm winds the ratio L/l is close to unity (see Figure 5), i.e. the slick is practically round for the duration of the measurement. Thus the dynamics of SF in natural conditions at weak wind speeds is practically completely defined by the spreading coefficient. At present the problem of the influence of waves and wind on the spreading of surface films is insufficiently studied. Below we will analyse one specific case observed in the experiment in more detail in order to obtain accurate information about the impact of swell on surface film dynamics. This case, dated 7 July 2005, was characterised by a stable moderate wind (9 m s− 1) Adenosine blowing until 11:00 hrs, as shown in Figure 8a. Between 11:00 and 11:40 hrs the wind abated to 1.6 m s− 1. Surface film spreading was recorded from 11:50 to 12:20 hrs. The observation interval is shown by the arrows in Figure 8a. The wave spectra S(f) measured from 10:00 to 11:00 hrs and from 11:50 to 12:20 hrs are shown in Figure 8b by solid and dashed lines respectively. It can be seen from Figure 8b that the levels of both spectra lie within the frequency range shown. The significant wave heights before and during the experiment were 0.64 and 0.62 m respectively.