surfaceFieldValue with sampled surface and interpolation could be simplified

If the sampled surface has interpolate() on, the face value is obtained by using a cellPoint interpolation to the surface vertices, which are then averaged for each face. It would likely make more sense to simply use a cellPoint interpolation to the face centre.

Any opinions? @andy @Mattijs @Sergio

Where is the averaging for each face? I would expect the 'interpolate()' to cause a value for every vertex

Here at Line 98+

You're asking the e.g. triSurfaceMesh to sample at a point which is not on the surface? Or are you planning to have three possible states:

• triangle based value (non-interpolated)
• vertex based value (interpolated())
• random-coordinate-in-cell based value

or bypass the interpolation of the surface and just do it yourself? That would be a different interpretation of interpolation just for surfaceFieldValue.

I'm think that the surfaceFieldValue idea of "interpolate" was a workaround to get cellPoint value on a face, since previous versions of sampledSurface could only sample a cell value, but didn't have cellPoint to a face (6baffa134900e7 - added for 1806).

mentioned in commit a6a3ddb790fb2b409cba91e9c4ddc014c86c73cf

mentioned in merge request !241 (closed)

mentioned in commit 1377b224f04d6da6db3d1f7e829be8c3516717ba

closed

mentioned in commit a88e67f2

mentioned in issue #1662 (closed)