ality ($A$ and $B$), much more than it affects the exponent of ${\rm Pr}{\rm Ra}_T$ ($a$ and $b$). For ${\rm Ta^*}=0.01$ rotation has a minimal effect on the fluxes in each layered phase and the relationship between flux and Pr${\rm Ra}_T$ is the same as in the non-rotating case [@Wood2013]. For ${\rm Ta^*}=0.1$ however, rotation reduces the coefficient $A$ by almost a factor $5$ and increases the exponent $a$ by around $15\%$. There is evidence however that this change in the exponent may be due to the fact that the relative effect of rotation decreases for increasing values of Pr${\rm Ra}_T$. Indeed, Figure \[fig:RoPlot\] shows an increase in Rossby number as layers merge in low ${\rm Ta^*}$ simulations (see Equation(\[eq:RoNum\]) for definition of Rossby number). This suggests that for sufficiently large layer heights rotational effects could become negligible and the flux law probably tends to the one found by @Wood2013. This will need to be verified in simulations using larger computational domains.

\[tab:FitData\]

  -------------- ------------ ------- ------ ------- ------
   ${\rm Ta^*}$    ${\rm Ta}$   $A$    $a$     $B$    $b$
        0                   0  0.076   0.32   0.21    0.36
       0.01                 1  0.071   0.32   0.22    0.35
       0.1                 10  0.016   0.37   0.035   0.42
  -------------- ------------ ------- ------ ------- ------

  : Best fits for data presented in Figure \[fig:LayerSats\]. \[tab:RaTFits\]

![Rossby number Ro (left) and average horizontal lengthscale of turbulent eddies $L_h$ (right) for simulations with ${\rm Pr}=\tau=0.1$, $R_0^{-1}=1.25$ and $\theta = 0$, for various values of ${\rm Ta^*}$. Noteworthy is that ${\rm Ro}$ increases as layers merge in the low ${\rm Ta^*}$ regime suggesting a decreased influence of rotation. Also note how the horizontal length scale in the high ${\rm Ta^*}$ simulations, which host a large-scale vortex, is constrained by the domain size.[]{data-label="
ality ($ A$ and $ B$), much more than it affects the exponent of $ { \rm Pr}{\rm Ra}_T$ ($ a$ and $ b$). For $ { \rm Ta^*}=0.01 $ rotation has a minimal consequence on the flux in each layered phase and the relationship between flux and Pr${\rm Ra}_T$ is the same as in the non - rotating lawsuit [ @Wood2013 ]. For $ { \rm Ta^*}=0.1 $ however, rotation reduces the coefficient $ A$ by almost a gene $ 5 $ and increase the exponent $ a$ by about $ 15\%$. There is evidence however that this change in the advocate may be due to the fact that the relative effect of rotation decreases for increase values of Pr${\rm Ra}_T$. Indeed, Figure \[fig: RoPlot\ ] shows an increase in Rossby number as layers unify in low $ { \rm Ta^*}$ simulations (see Equation(\[eq: RoNum\ ]) for definition of Rossby issue). This suggests that for sufficiently large layer heights rotational consequence could become negligible and the flux law probably tends to the one found by @Wood2013. This will necessitate to be verified in simulations using larger computational domains. 

 \[tab: FitData\ ] 

   -------------- ------------ ------- ------ ------- ------ 
    $ { \rm Ta^*}$     $ { \rm Ta}$    $ A$     $ a$      $ B$     $ b$ 
         0                    0   0.076    0.32    0.21     0.36 
        0.01                  1   0.071    0.32    0.22     0.35 
        0.1                  10   0.016    0.37    0.035    0.42 
   -------------- ------------ ------- ------ ------- ------ 

  : Best fits for data presented in Figure \[fig: LayerSats\ ]. \[tab: RaTFits\ ] 

! [ Rossby number Ro (left) and average horizontal lengthscale of turbulent eddies $ L_h$ (right) for simulations with $ { \rm Pr}=\tau=0.1 $, $ R_0^{-1}=1.25 $ and $ \theta = 0 $, for various values of $ { \rm Ta^*}$. Noteworthy is that $ { \rm Ro}$ addition as layers merge in the depleted $ { \rm Ta^*}$ regimen suggesting a decreased influence of rotation. besides note how the horizontal duration scale in the high $ { \rm Ta^*}$ model, which host a large - scale vortex, is constrained by the domain size.[]{data - label= "
alihy ($A$ and $B$), much more thak it affects the exponeit of ${\rj Pr}{\rm Rx}_T$ ($a$ and $b$). For ${\rm Ta^*}=0.01$ rotatioi haw a munimal effect on the fuuxes in vach layeeed khase and the relefionshii betscen fnnx and Pr${\rm Ra}_T$ is the sake as in the nmn-focating case [@Wood2013]. For ${\rm Ta^*}=0.1$ however, rjtation rfduces the coesficpegt $A$ by almost a factor $5$ and increases the exkonent $a$ by around $15\%$. There is evidence howeveg thwt this change in hhe exponenj mar be due to tfe fact that the relatjve effect of rotation decreaser for increasint calkgs of Pr${\rm Re}_T$. Indved, Figure \[fin:GoPlot\] vhows am increase in Vossbb nunber as layers merge mn low ${\rm Ta^*}$ simulatyons (see Aqbation(\[eq:RoNum\]) for defunution of Sossct njmbtr). Vhia suggfsta that for sufficientoy large layer heigntf rotational erfects cjuld become negligible and the flux law prkbably tends to the one found by @Wood2013. This wlll need eo be verified in simulations using larger computdtionel donalns.

\[txv:FltData\]

  -------------- ------------ ------- ------ ------- ------
   ${\rm Ta^*}$    ${\rm Ta}$   $A$    $a$     $B$    $b$
        0                   0  0.076   0.32   0.21    0.36
       0.01                 1  0.071   0.32   0.22    0.35
       0.1                 10  0.016   0.37   0.035   0.42
  -------------- ------------ ------- ------ ------- ------

  : Bewt fits for batq presented in Figbre \[fig:LayerRats\]. \[tab:RsTFits\]

![Rossby number Ro (ueft) and averagf horizonfxl lengthscale ow tlrbunent eddies $L_h$ (right) for symulationw wich ${\rm Pr}=\gau=0.1$, $T_0^{-1}=1.25$ and $\treta = 0$, for various values of ${\rm Ta^*}$. Notecorthf is that ${\gm Ro}$ increases as layers merge in the low ${\rm Td^*}$ rvgime sugyestinn a decreased igfluence of rojation. Alfo noge how the horizoital length fcale in the vlgh ${\rm Ta^*}$ sikulationf, whuch yost a uxrge-scale vortrx, is constrained bt the domain size.[]{deta-lxgel="
ality ($A$ and $B$), much more than the of ${\rm Ra}_T$ ($a$ and has minimal effect on fluxes in each phase and the relationship between flux Pr${\rm Ra}_T$ is the same as in the non-rotating case [@Wood2013]. For ${\rm however, rotation reduces the coefficient $A$ by almost a factor $5$ and increases exponent by $15\%$. is evidence however that this change in the exponent may be due to the fact that relative effect of rotation decreases for increasing values Pr${\rm Ra}_T$. Indeed, Figure shows an increase in Rossby as merge in ${\rm simulations Equation(\[eq:RoNum\]) for definition Rossby number). This suggests that for sufficiently large layer heights rotational effects could become negligible and the law probably the one by This need to be simulations using larger computational domains. \[tab:FitData\] ------ ------- ------ ${\rm Ta^*}$ ${\rm Ta}$ $A$ $B$ $b$ 0 0.076 0.32 0.21 0.36 0.01 0.071 0.32 0.22 0.35 0.1 10 0.016 0.37 0.42 -------------- ------------ ------- ------ ------- ------ : Best fits for data presented in Figure ![Rossby number Ro (left) average horizontal lengthscale turbulent $L_h$ for with ${\rm $R_0^{-1}=1.25$ and $\theta = 0$, for various values of ${\rm Ta^*}$. is that ${\rm Ro}$ increases as layers merge in the Ta^*}$ suggesting a decreased of rotation. Also note the length scale in the Ta^*}$ which vortex, constrained the domain size.[]{data-label="
ality ($A$ and $B$), much more than it aFfects the eXponeNt oF ${\rm pr}{\Rm Ra}_t$ ($a$ anD $b$). For ${\rm Ta^*}=0.01$ rotatIOn haS a minimal effect on the flUxes iN eACh laYErEd phaSe and thE ReLATioNsHiP beTwEEn Flux aNd PR${\rm Ra}_T$ iS the same as In tHe Non-rotating cASe [@wood2013]. For ${\rm TA^*}=0.1$ hoWever, rotatioN reDuces tHe CoeFFicieNt $A$ By almOst a faCTor $5$ and Increases ThE ExponeNT $a$ by aroUND $15\%$. THere Is evidence however THaT This change in thE exponEnT MaY BE duE to The fact thaT tHe relATive effECt OF ROtaTIon decreases fOr increasinG ValUes of PR${\rM Ra}_t$. indeed, figurE \[fIG:Roplot\] shows an IncrEase in RosSby numBEr as layERs merge In low ${\rM Ta^*}$ SimUlatIOnS (sEe EQuATioN(\[Eq:roNUM\]) foR definitIoN oF RossBy nuMBER). this SugGestS that For sufficientLy lArge LAyeR heigHts roTatiOnAl effEcts coUld beCoMe negligible and The fLux law proBabLy TenDs To the ONe founD by @wooD2013. This wiLl need tO Be vErIFIEd In simulations using LaRGEr ComputatIonal dOMaInS.

\[Tab:FitDaTa\]

  -------------- ------------ ------- ------ ------- ------
   ${\Rm TA^*}$    ${\rm TA}$   $a$    $A$     $B$    $b$
        0                   0  0.076   0.32   0.21    0.36
       0.01                 1  0.071   0.32   0.22    0.35
       0.1                 10  0.016   0.37   0.035   0.42
  -------------- ------------ ------- ------ ------- ------

  : BeSt fiTS fOr data prEsenteD In fiGure \[fig:laYerSatS\]. \[tAb:RATFIts\]

![RoSSby nUmber RO (left) and AveraGE horizontal lenGThscale of turbULeNT EdDIes $L_H$ (riGht) for simulAtioNS witH ${\rm PR}=\TaU=0.1$, $R_0^{-1}=1.25$ aND $\thetA = 0$, for vArIOuS Values of ${\rm Ta^*}$. NoteworThY is thaT ${\rm Ro}$ Increases as laYers merge iN THE low ${\rm Ta^*}$ RegiME sUGgesting a decreAsed iNfluence of ROtation. ALso noTe how the HorizontaL LEngth scaLe iN thE hiGh ${\rM tA^*}$ sImulations, whiCH Host A lArge-scaLe vOrtex, is ConStrAinEd bY tHe domain sIze.[]{data-lAbEl="
ality ($A$ and $B$), muchmore thanit af fec tsth e ex pone nt of ${\rm Pr } {\rm  Ra}_T$ ($a$ and $b$).  For${ \ rm T a ^* }=0.0 1$ rota t io n has  a  m ini ma l  e ffect  on  the fl uxes in ea chla yered phasea nd  the relat ion ship between  fl ux and  P r${ \ rm Ra }_T $ isthe sa m e as i n the non -r o tating case [@ W o od 2013 ]. For ${\rm Ta^* } =0 . 1$ however, ro tation  r e du c e s t hecoefficien t$A$ b y  almost af a c tor $5$ and incre ases the ex p one nt $a$  b y a r ound $ 15\%$ .T her e is eviden ce h owever th at thi s  change in theexpone ntmay  bed ue  t o t he fac t  t hat the  relativ eef fectof r o t a t iondec reas es fo r increasingval ueso f P r${\r m Ra} _T$.  I ndeed , Figu re \[ fi g:RoPlot\] show s an  increase  in  R oss by  numb e r as l aye rsmerge i n low $ { \rm  T a ^ * }$  simulations (seeEq u a ti on(\[eq: RoNum\ ] )fo r  definit io n o f Ro s s by nu mber ) .This sug gestst ha tfor suf fi cientl ylar gelayer heig hts ro tational  effe c ts could becom e  negligible a n dt h ef luxlaw  probably t ends to t he o n efou n d by@Wood 20 1 3. This will need to b everifi ed in  simulationsusing larg e r computat iona l  d o mains.

\[tab: FitDa ta\]

  -- - -------- --- - -------- --- ----- - -  --------- --- - - --- - - 
  ${\rm Ta^*} $    $ {\ rm Ta}$   $A$   $a$     $ B$  $b$
       0            0   0.076 0.3 2  0 .21  0.36      0. 01           1   0. 07 1  0. 32 0.22   0 . 35      0.1            1 0  0.01 6   0.37   0. 03 5   0.42
 - --- ------ - - -- ----- ------- ------- ------- --------- ---
  :Best fits  fo r data  pr e sented  in Fi gure\[ fig : L ayerS a t s\ ].\[ tab:RaTFit s \ ]
![Ros sb y nu mber Ro  (left) and averag e  ho rizontal leng ths cale o ftur b ul e nted d ies $ L_h$ (right) fo r simulati on s  w ith ${\rmP r}= \t au=0.1$ , $R_0^ {-1}= 1 .25$ an d $\theta  = 0$, fo rvari o u s v alues of $ {\rm Ta^ *}$. Note w orthy is  that  ${ \rm Ro }$  in creas es asl aye rs me rge in  t he low  ${\r mTa^*}$ r egime suggesting a decr easedinflu enc e of rota tio n . A lso notehowthe horizo nta l l ength  sc a le in  the hi gh$ {\rmTa^* } $ simulat i on s,w h ic h host a la r g e -sc ale v ort e x, iscons trained by the do m ain size.[]{da ta-l a b el= "
ality ($A$_and $B$),_much more than it_affects the_exponent_of ${\rm_Pr}{\rm_Ra}_T$ ($a$ and_$b$). For ${\rm_Ta^*}=0.01$ rotation has a_minimal effect on_the_fluxes in each layered phase and the relationship between flux and Pr${\rm Ra}_T$ is_the_same as_in_the_non-rotating case [@Wood2013]. For ${\rm_Ta^*}=0.1$ however, rotation reduces the_coefficient $A$_by almost a factor $5$ and increases the_exponent_$a$ by around_$15\%$. There is evidence however that this change in_the exponent may be due to_the fact that_the_relative_effect of rotation decreases_for increasing values of Pr${\rm Ra}_T$._Indeed, Figure \[fig:RoPlot\] shows an increase_in Rossby number as layers merge in_low ${\rm Ta^*}$ simulations (see Equation(\[eq:RoNum\])_for definition of Rossby number)._This suggests_that for sufficiently large layer_heights rotational effects_could become_negligible and the_flux law probably tends to the_one found by_@Wood2013. This will need to be_verified_in simulations using_larger_computational_domains.

\[tab:FitData\]

 _-------------- ------------ -------_------_------- ------
__ ${\rm Ta^*}$   _${\rm_Ta}$   $A$   _$a$   __$B$   _$b$
    _   0  _ _ _          _ 0  0.076  _0.32   0.21_ __0.36
  __ _ 0.01     _ _     _   1__0.071   0.32  _0.22    0.35
 _    _0.1__    _     _  _ 10  0.016   0.37__ 0.035   0.42
 _--------------_------------ ------- ------ ------- ------

 _:_Best_fits for data presented in_Figure \[fig:LayerSats\]. \[tab:RaTFits\]

![Rossby number Ro (left)_and average horizontal lengthscale of turbulent eddies $L_h$ (right)_for simulations with_${\rm Pr}=\tau=0.1$, $R_0^{-1}=1.25$ and $\theta_=_0$,_for various values of ${\rm Ta^*}$. Noteworthy is that ${\rm_Ro}$ increases_as layers merge_in the low ${\rm Ta^*}$ regime suggesting a decreased influence_of rotation. Also note how the horizontal_length scale in the high ${\rm Ta^*}$ simulations, which host a_large-scale vortex, is constrained by the domain size.[]{data-label="