Add nucTempHelper to CylindricalComponentsAverageBlockCollection

[mgjarrett]

What is the change?

This PR adds a _getNucTempHelper method to CylindricalComponentsAverageBlockCollection

Why is the change being made?

The CylindricalComponentsAverageBlockCollection was implemented recently: #1238

It needs to have a _getNucTempHelper method like some of the other block collections, e.g., the AverageBlockCollection, in order to perform downstream analyses that require this method.

---

Checklist

• This PR has only one purpose or idea.
• Tests have been added/updated to verify that the new/changed code works.

• The code style follows good practices.
• The commit message(s) follow good practices.

• The release notes (location doc/release/0.X.rst) are up-to-date with any important changes.
• The documentation is still up-to-date in the doc folder.
• The dependencies are still up-to-date in setup.py.

[keckler]

This looks good.

At first I thought that the 1D slab class would need a similar _getNucTempHelper method. But looking at that class, it seems like it is hard-coded to only ever work for isothermal reactors, so such an averaging process isn't needed. Is that your assessment as well?

[keckler]

I guess this is just a check to see that the NotImplementedError doesn't arise? Not sure if it's easy to add more to this test?

[mgjarrett]

This looks good.

At first I thought that the 1D slab class would need a similar _getNucTempHelper method. But looking at that class, it seems like it is hard-coded to only ever work for isothermal reactors, so such an averaging process isn't needed. Is that your assessment as well?

Yeah, the fact that it explicitly raises a NotImplementedError for _getNucTempHelper even though it inherits the same thing from BlockCollection makes me think that somebody really doesn't want it to be implemented. I don't think it would be harmful to implement one, but there's also no apparent need for it, so I'm happy to just maintain status quo here.

[keckler]

Is there something blocking this from being merged? It is a feature that I think is needed for our current analyses and its been sitting up here for months now. I have been manually pulling this branch into my installation because I need it, so it'd be great if we can just merge it.

[albeanth]

@keckler it's dependent on a larger downstream PR. It should get merged soon.