Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2700
© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2700
© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
17 Nov 2023
| 17 Nov 2023
Meeting Summary: Exploring Cloud Dynamics with Cloud Model 1 and 3D Visualization – insights from a University Modeling Workshop
Abstract. We introduce an innovative two-week educational block course held at the University of Bonn during the 2023 winter semester, focusing on Cloud Model 1 (CM1) and its convection-permitting capabilities. During the course, students gained essential skills in setting up and customizing CM1 simulations on high-performance computing clusters, while delving into deep moist convection dynamics. An additional introduction to three-dimensional visualization software allowed the participants to transform numerical data into compelling visualizations, deepening their insights into cloud dynamics. Students applied their gained knowledge in research projects of their own choice that will be presented here and in the supplementary material.
How to cite. Schielicke, L., Li, Y., Schyns, J., Sperschneider, A., Solano Marchini, J. P., and Gatzen, C. P.: Meeting Summary: Exploring Cloud Dynamics with Cloud Model 1 and 3D Visualization – insights from a University Modeling Workshop, EGUsphere [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2700, 2023.
Download & links
- Preprint
(8847 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(41865 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: closed
Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor
| : Report abuse
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2700', Anonymous Referee #1, 11 Dec 2023
General comments:
- The motivation/introduction would be improved with additional information. For example, example, where in the curriculum does this course fit in? Are these undergraduate students or graduate students? Is there any other course that covers this material? Additional background about this and why the course was developed would be useful to include. Are there pre-existing courses elsewhere that this course was modeled after? The degree of innovation of this course would be clearer with both more specific context of the institution as well as broader community context (i.e., how novel is this course).
- With regards to course design/requirements, I have several questions. What was the title of the course? What were the course learning objectives? Did students self-select into this course? How many hours per day and days per week did the course meet? How did the authors decide the topics to cover? How were students evaluated? What was submitted with the project? What were the course requirements? Was the class conducted using in-person instruction? What was the method of content delivery (e.g., lecture vs. active learning activities vs. group work, etc)? How many students were enrolled? This section in particular needed a lot more information in it to give readers a good sense of what the course was like.
- Highlighting the student projects is interesting, though given the limited time spent on them (thus preventing a more detailed analysis), I would be more curious about student feedback about the course and the skills that they were supposed to acquire. If the authors continue to include these projects, a bit more information about them would be helpful (e.g., how these were assessed). Alternatively, simply including them in the supplemental material would be sufficient.
- Was there any kind of pre- and post-assessment given to students? Being able to demonstrate that this course was impactful on student understanding of convection (in a quantified way) as well as specific skills would be very useful, particularly given the short timeline.
Specific comments:
- Line 28: By “realistic models,” do you mean operational models? The phase “realistic” implies that the results from CM1 are unrealistic, which is not correct.
- Line 35: Since the authors are specific in their choice of model, what software was used to visualize model results? This is mentioned later, but would be helpful to describe here as well.
- Line 42: Is visualization instruction rare at your institution, or more broadly? If so, please provide a citation or other reference.
- Line 134: I don’t think there is enough information given about what is active learning or what sorts of learning activities occurred in the course on a day-to-day basis for the authors to be able to describe the course as using an active learning approach. It may be an appropriate label, but there simply isn’t enough information provided to the reader.
- Line 156: I’m unfamiliar with the term “fazit”
Technical corrections:
- Line 16: The phrase “…often essential for a further career in meteorology” sounds a bit off. Further, not every single scientist who earns a degree in meteorology needs these skills. Thus, I suggest rephrasing to something like “…often essential for many career paths in meteorology”
- Line 84: “A follow-up course is in planning” should be “A follow-up course is currently being planned.”
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2700-RC1 - AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Lisa Schielicke, 03 Feb 2024
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2700', Anonymous Referee #2, 12 Dec 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-2700/egusphere-2023-2700-RC2-supplement.pdf
- AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Lisa Schielicke, 03 Feb 2024
Status: closed
Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor
| : Report abuse
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2700', Anonymous Referee #1, 11 Dec 2023
General comments:
- The motivation/introduction would be improved with additional information. For example, example, where in the curriculum does this course fit in? Are these undergraduate students or graduate students? Is there any other course that covers this material? Additional background about this and why the course was developed would be useful to include. Are there pre-existing courses elsewhere that this course was modeled after? The degree of innovation of this course would be clearer with both more specific context of the institution as well as broader community context (i.e., how novel is this course).
- With regards to course design/requirements, I have several questions. What was the title of the course? What were the course learning objectives? Did students self-select into this course? How many hours per day and days per week did the course meet? How did the authors decide the topics to cover? How were students evaluated? What was submitted with the project? What were the course requirements? Was the class conducted using in-person instruction? What was the method of content delivery (e.g., lecture vs. active learning activities vs. group work, etc)? How many students were enrolled? This section in particular needed a lot more information in it to give readers a good sense of what the course was like.
- Highlighting the student projects is interesting, though given the limited time spent on them (thus preventing a more detailed analysis), I would be more curious about student feedback about the course and the skills that they were supposed to acquire. If the authors continue to include these projects, a bit more information about them would be helpful (e.g., how these were assessed). Alternatively, simply including them in the supplemental material would be sufficient.
- Was there any kind of pre- and post-assessment given to students? Being able to demonstrate that this course was impactful on student understanding of convection (in a quantified way) as well as specific skills would be very useful, particularly given the short timeline.
Specific comments:
- Line 28: By “realistic models,” do you mean operational models? The phase “realistic” implies that the results from CM1 are unrealistic, which is not correct.
- Line 35: Since the authors are specific in their choice of model, what software was used to visualize model results? This is mentioned later, but would be helpful to describe here as well.
- Line 42: Is visualization instruction rare at your institution, or more broadly? If so, please provide a citation or other reference.
- Line 134: I don’t think there is enough information given about what is active learning or what sorts of learning activities occurred in the course on a day-to-day basis for the authors to be able to describe the course as using an active learning approach. It may be an appropriate label, but there simply isn’t enough information provided to the reader.
- Line 156: I’m unfamiliar with the term “fazit”
Technical corrections:
- Line 16: The phrase “…often essential for a further career in meteorology” sounds a bit off. Further, not every single scientist who earns a degree in meteorology needs these skills. Thus, I suggest rephrasing to something like “…often essential for many career paths in meteorology”
- Line 84: “A follow-up course is in planning” should be “A follow-up course is currently being planned.”
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2700-RC1 - AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Lisa Schielicke, 03 Feb 2024
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2700', Anonymous Referee #2, 12 Dec 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-2700/egusphere-2023-2700-RC2-supplement.pdf
- AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Lisa Schielicke, 03 Feb 2024
Viewed
Total article views: 225 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
Cumulative views and downloads
(calculated since 17 Nov 2023)
| HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 139 | 68 | 18 | 225 | 29 | 8 | 7 |
- HTML: 139
- PDF: 68
- XML: 18
- Total: 225
- Supplement: 29
- BibTeX: 8
- EndNote: 7
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Total article views: 227 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
Thereof 227 with geography defined
and 0 with unknown origin.
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
1
Latest update: 27 Apr 2024
Lisa Schielicke
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
University Bonn, Institute of Geosciences, Department Meteorology, Auf dem Hügel 20, 53121 Bonn, Germany
Yidan Li
University Bonn, Institute of Geosciences, Department Meteorology, Auf dem Hügel 20, 53121 Bonn, Germany
Jerome Schyns
University Bonn, Institute of Geosciences, Department Meteorology, Auf dem Hügel 20, 53121 Bonn, Germany
Aaron Sperschneider
University Bonn, Institute of Geosciences, Department Meteorology, Auf dem Hügel 20, 53121 Bonn, Germany
Jose Pablo Solano Marchini
University Bonn, Institute of Geosciences, Department Meteorology, Auf dem Hügel 20, 53121 Bonn, Germany
Christoph Peter Gatzen
European Severe Storms Laboratory e.V. (ESSL), c/o DLR, Münchener Str. 20 82234 Wessling, Germany
Short summary
We present course contents and results of a two-week educational block course with focus on Cloud Model 1 (CM1) and 3D visualization. Through hands-on experience, students gained skills in setting up and customizing the model and visualizing its output in 3D. The research aimed to bridge the gap between classroom learning and practical applications, fostering a deeper understanding of convective processes and preparing students for future careers in the field.
We present course contents and results of a two-week educational block course with focus on...