radius of the droplet, $\theta_{0}$ is the Young’s angle, and $A$ is the surface area of the droplet. While there are small deviations between the theoretically predicted droplet shapes and the simulations, both match well.

![Error in the radius of the base of the droplet as a function of resolution for a contact angle of $\theta_{0} = \pi/4$. \[figure:resolution\]](fig3){width="60.00000%"}

The convergence of the error as a function of resolution is shown in figure \[figure:resolution\]. The x axis shows the resolution. The values of the time steps at these resolutions are: $0.1 \si{\mu \s}$, $0.05 \si{\mu \s}$, $0.025 \si{\mu \s}$, and $0.01 \si{\mu
\s}$, to keep the Courant number of the same order between simulations. The y axis shows the absolute error, $\epsilon_{{\text{abs}}}$, between the theoretical value for the radius of the base of the droplet and the simulated value for a Young’s angle of $\theta_{0} = \pi/4$. The graph shows that the code is close to 2nd order accurate.

![\[figure:pressureEquil\] Pressure at the wall at $t = 50 \si{\milli
\s}$ for different resolutions and a contact angle of $\theta_{0} = \pi/4$](fig4){width="60.00000%"}

Because the interface gets thinner as resolution increases the Volume Of Fluid method is mesh dependent. As can be 