Application of the Nonlinear SST Turbulence Model for Simulation of Anisotropic Flows


  • Andrey A. Savelyev Central Aerohydrodynamic Institute (TsAGI), Zhukovsky, Russia
  • Innokentiy A. Kursakov
  • Evgeniy S. Matyash Central Aerohydrodynamic Institute (TsAGI), Zhukovsky, Russia
  • Evgeny V. Streltsov Central Aerohydrodynamic Institute (TsAGI), Zhukovsky, Russia
  • Ruslan A. Shtin Central Aerohydrodynamic Institute (TsAGI), Zhukovsky, Russia



turbulence model, nonlinear SST, SST NL, turbulence anisotropy, corner flow, corner separation


The application of the nonlinear SST turbulence model (SST NL) for the calculation of flows with turbulence anisotropy is considered. The results of the following validation test cases are presented: the flow in a square duct, the corner flow separation at a wing-body junction (NASA Juncture Flow) and the transonic wing flow (NASA CRM). The nonlinear model has been found to significantly improve the quality of simulating the anisotropic flows as compared to models based on the Boussinesq hypothesis. It is shown that the model prevents false corner separation at the wing-body junction and thereby achieves a qualitative improvement in simulation results. The test case of the transonic wing flow revealed an upstream displacement of the shock wave on the upper side of the wing which leads to an underestimation of the lift force when using the SST NL model. In all the tests considered, the SST NL model required an increase in computational cost of at most 5 % compared to the conventional SST model.


Allmaras, S.R., Johnson, F.T., Spalart, P.R.: Modifications and clarifications for the implementation of the Spalart–Allmaras turbulence model. In: Seventh International Conference on Computational Fluid Dynamics (ICCFD7). pp. 1–11. No. 1902 (2012)

Bosnyakov, S., Kursakov, I., Lysenkov, A., et al.: Computational tools for supporting the testing of civil aircraft configurations in wind tunnels. Progress in Aerospace Sciences 44(2), 67–120 (2008).

Bosnyakov, S.M., Gorbushin, A.R., Kursakov, I.A., et al.: About verification and validation of computational methods and codes on the basis of Godunov method. TsAGI Science Journal 48(7), 597–615 (2017).

Cecora, R.D., Radespiel, R., Eisfeld, B., Probst, A.: Differential Reynolds-stress modeling for aeronautics. AIAA Journal 53(3), 739–755 (2015).

Garbaruk, A.V.: Numerical simulation and stability analysis of wall-bounded turbulent flows. DSc Thesis, Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University (2020)

Kegerise, M.A., Neuhart, D.H.: An experimental investigation of a wing-fuselage junction model in the NASA Langley 14- by 22-foot subsonic tunnel. NASA TM (220286), 1–195 (2019).

Launder, B.E., Reece, G.J., Rodi, W.: Progress in the development of a Reynolds-stress turbulence closure. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 68(3), 537–566 (1975)

Matyash, E.S., Savelyev, A.A., Troshin, A.I., Ustinov, M.V.: Allowance for gas compressibility in the γ-model of the laminar-turbulent transition. Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Physics 59(10), 1720–1731 (2019).

Matyushenko, A.A., Garbaruk, A.V.: Non-linear correction for the k-ω SST turbulence model. Journal of Physics: Conference Series 929(1), 1–6 (2017).

Menter, F.R., Garbaruk, A.V., Egorov, Y.: Explicit algebraic Reynolds stress models for anisotropic wall-bounded flows. Progress in Flight Physics 3, 89–104 (2012).

Menter, F.R., Kuntz, M., Langtry, R.: Ten years of industrial experience with the SST turbulence model. Turbulence Heat and Mass Transfer 4, 625–632 (2003)

Menter, F.R.: Zonal two equation k-ω turbulence models for aerodynamic Flows. AIAA Paper (2906) (1993)

Morrison, J.H.: 7th AIAA CFD Drag Prediction Workshop., accessed: 2022-09-10

Morrison, J.H., Kleb, B.: Observations on CFD verification and validation from the AIAA drag prediction workshops. AIAA Paper (0202), 1–21 (2014).

Pope, S.: A more general effective-viscosity hypothesis. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 72, 331–340 (1975)

Raiesi, H., Piomelli, U., Pollard, A.: Evaluation of turbulence models using direct numerical and large-eddy simulation data. Journal of Fluids Engineering 133(2) (2011).

Rivers, M.: NASA Common Research Model., accessed: 2022-09-10

Rumsey, C.L., Lee, H.C., Pulliam, T.H.: Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes computations of the NASA Juncture Flow model using FUN3D and OVERFLOW. AIAA Paper (1304), 1–31 (2020).

Rumsey, C.: NASA Juncture Flow., accessed: 2022-09-10

Spalart, P.R.: Strategies for turbulence modelling and simulations. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 21(3), 252–263 (2000).

Spalart, P.R., Allmaras, S.R.: A one-equation turbulence model for aerodynamic flows. AIAA Paper (0439) (1992).

Tinoco, E., Keye, S.: Drag predictions at and beyond cruise for the Common Research Model by an international collaborative community (2022)

Tinoco, E.N., Brodersen, O.P., Keye, S., et al.: Summary data from the sixth AIAA CFD drag prediction workshop: CRM cases. Journal of Aircraft 55(4), 1352–1379 (2018).

Wallin, S., Johansson, A.V.: An explicit algebraic Reynolds stress model for incompressible and compressible turbulent flows. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 403, 89–132 (2000).




How to Cite

Savelyev, A. A., Kursakov, I. A., Matyash, E. S., Streltsov, E. V., & Shtin, R. A. (2022). Application of the Nonlinear SST Turbulence Model for Simulation of Anisotropic Flows. Supercomputing Frontiers and Innovations, 9(4), 38–48.

Most read articles by the same author(s)