HENFOIL vs XFOIL: when the browser workspace is the point

XFOIL is the solver. HENFOIL is the decision trail

XFOIL is free, it runs on your machine, and a generation of airfoil work was done in its text session. If the job is one viscous polar of a coordinate file you already trust, XFOIL still does that job. HENFOIL does not ask you to throw that away. It is the place you go when the polar has to sit next to a geometry check, a second method, a report, and a file another tool can read.

This comparison is about what each tool is for. It is not a table of invented lift and drag errors. A fair number needs the same coordinates, the same Reynolds number, the same transition policy, and a published test. That benchmark page is not in the product yet, so this article does not pretend the comparison has already been scored.

What you keep doing in XFOIL

• A local viscous–inviscid polar, with the amplification and trip settings you already know.
• A coordinate file in Selig order, edited in the tool you prefer.
• A .pol you already have. HENFOIL’s validation import recognizes an XFOIL polar header and can place that curve next to a HENFOIL prediction. The page says whether the two curves are comparable. It does not issue a tunnel certificate.

What HENFOIL adds around that polar

• A section you can find again. Generate NACA, CST, Joukowski, and the other families from the engine equations, or paste a DAT. Catalog originals stay read-only. Your working copy is the one you analyse.
• A geometry gate before the polar. Thickness, camber, leading edge, trailing edge, and a repair you can inspect and then apply. A polar of a crossed or open section is a different airfoil than the one you meant.
• More than one method, each named. Thin-airfoil, panel, viscous–inviscid with eⁿ, linear-vorticity panel, Euler plus an integral boundary layer, a body-fitted RANS-SA screen, a Navier–Stokes field, and a 3-D wing-block Euler. The result carries the method. HEN-AI explains that stored result. It does not invent a coefficient.
• The rest of the loop. Compare, envelope, selection, a decision study, robustness, and an inverse or optimization screen. Then a datasheet or design-review PDF, and a loft to STEP or IGES.
• The rotor handoff XFOIL users ask for. On Polars, extend a solved curve to 360° and export AeroDyn, QBlade, or an XFOIL .pol. Extrapolated points stay marked. That extension is a model on top of the solved range, not a measurement past stall.
• A team, not a shared folder of .pol files. Student, Professional, and Team unlock the same tools. They differ by how many projects, polars, and reports you can run. Team seats share one budget.

What HENFOIL will not claim

HENFOIL is a screening workspace. It is not a wind tunnel and it is not an airworthiness acceptance. A RANS point spends compute credits and comes back with the limits of that screen. A failed run refunds the feature meter it spent, so a bad panel count does not burn the month. There is not yet a public page of HENFOIL against XFOIL against NACA tunnel data on a fixed list of sections, and there is not yet a badge that says a result sits outside a tested range. Until that page exists, treat agreement with a tunnel as something you check on Validation with your own measured polar.

When HENFOIL is the better tool

Use XFOIL when you want one local polar and you already own the file. Use HENFOIL when the section has to be generated, checked, run by more than one method, explained, compared, and handed to a report or a rotor deck without copying numbers between windows. The paid plans start at Student. The solver session you already have stays free. The workspace is what the subscription is for.

In simple words: what this page is for

XFOIL is a free local viscous solver. HENFOIL is the section workspace around a C++ engine: geometry, several methods, reports, and a handoff to rotors. This page compares the jobs, not a made-up error table.

This lesson exists because section decisions fail when geometry, method labels and selection reasons are scattered. HENFOIL vs XFOIL: when the browser workspace is the point helps you keep a clean trail from shape to polar to choice.

Why the topic matters

Engineers lose time when a title sounds clear but the page only sketches the idea. This article expands HENFOIL vs XFOIL: when the browser workspace is the point so you can answer three questions without jargon: what is the idea, when do you use it, and how do you check it in a HENDOI product.

Read the sections above for the core definitions. Use the steps below to move from reading into a real project trail you can share with a teammate.

How to apply this in HENDOI

In practice: create a HENDOI account or log in, open HENFOIL, bring a section in (create, import DAT, or digitize), pass the geometry gate, climb the analysis ladder only as far as the decision needs, then compare and archive. Every calculated number should keep its method label.

When the section choice is ready for the aircraft, continue in HENSYNTH for mission, compliance and trades. Same account. Same plans.

What this page will not claim: a teaching polar or geometry note is not a flight-Re certificate. HENFOIL labels methods so you know what you bought. Tunnel data and professional judgement still sit outside any single software run.

Checklist before you leave this page

• Can you state the idea of HENFOIL vs XFOIL: when the browser workspace is the point in one sentence?
• Do you know which product owns the next action — HENFOIL or HENSYNTH?
• Will every number you keep carry a method label or a stored-run source?
• If you are new here, have you opened Register or Login?

Related reading on this site

• Airfoil selection with a documented why-#1
• The HENFOIL analysis ladder: when to escalate
• Create airfoil fields: NACA, analytic and CST — what each digit means
• Digitize field-by-field: every control, why fill it, what you get
• All HENDOI blog articles
• HENFOIL product page
• HENSYNTH product page
• Pricing — Student, Professional & Team
• FAQ
• Login · Register now