End-to-end bioprocess modelling
Represent process routes, material and energy balances, equipment, batch logic, schedules, economics, and environmental performance.
SuperPro Designer alternative · Acatian-published comparison · reviewed 14 October 2026
Compare browser collaboration, model versions and migration.
Acatian is an independent browser-based SuperPro Designer alternative for teams that want flowsheets, balances, dynamic models, scheduling, TEA/LCA, company data, collaboration, versions, and engineering evidence connected in one shared project. SuperPro Designer remains established Windows desktop process simulation software. Academic and research teams can request a focused 7-day evaluation for named faculty or research reviewers after a brief scope check. Student and wider-group access is scoped separately; no payment details are required for the request.01Browser-nativeProject roles, invitations, comments and change history in the browser.
02Versioned by designBranches, before/after diffs, restore, review, and approval context.
03Model + evidenceFlowsheet, ODE/PDE, schedule, TEA/LCA, sources, and readiness stay connected.
04API-first handoffStructured model exports and Python calculation jobs. Site connectors and outbound webhooks need separate implementation.
Quick answer
Is Acatian an alternative to SuperPro Designer?
Yes—with different trade-offs. Both support process modelling, balances, scheduling, and economic analysis. SuperPro Designer 15 is a mature Windows application with an extensive unit-operation library. Acatian is designed as a shared browser workspace where the model, evidence, changes, scenarios, and cross-functional review remain connected.How the engineering work is shared
Acatian adds browser access, native branches and model diffs, governed data intake, review context, APIs, and linked dynamic evidence around the process model.
Benchmark before migrating
Keep a validated SuperPro workflow as the reference until Acatian meets agreed tolerances on one authorized, customer-owned process.
30-second decision
Which SuperPro Designer alternative fits your team?
Choose the workflow that improves the real engineering decision. An established desktop model may remain the right reference; a shared, versioned system becomes valuable when work crosses teams, datasets, scenarios, and approval boundaries. For a three-way buyer view, read the Acatian vs SuperPro Designer vs Roebling comparison.When teams need to reconcile model versions and assumptions.
- Process development, MSAT, facility, manufacturing, TEA/LCA, and management need one process basis.
- Every assumption, source, parameter change, branch, result, and approval must remain traceable.
- Company datasets and external calculations must enter through governed, reviewable interfaces.
- Batch, fed-batch, perfusion, continuous, ODE/PDE, scheduling, economics, and sustainability must remain connected.
When an established desktop calculation package already answers the question.
- A qualified model, familiar unit-operation library, and existing report workflow already satisfy the project.
- The work is primarily performed by one modeller on Windows.
- The current validation basis is more valuable than browser collaboration or native version control.
- A controlled migration would add risk without improving the decision or handoff.
Capability comparison
SuperPro Designer vs Acatian: feature comparison.
SuperPro capabilities below are based on the vendor's current public documentation for Version 15. Acatian capabilities describe the current product and are deliberately separated from application-specific validation claims.| Decision criterion | SuperPro Designer | Acatian | Practical workflow effect |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authoring and access | Version 15 Windows 10/11 desktop application with fixed, floating, and corporate licensing. | Browser workspace for shared projects, roles, invitations, and controlled access. | No workstation handoff. The team opens the same current model and decision context. |
| Collaboration | Strong modeller workflow; broader review and communication are commonly handled through files and adjacent tools. | Comments, collaborators, project ownership, change plans, and review state live beside the model. | Reviewers can comment on the shared model alongside its changes, sources and review state. |
| Versions and alternatives | Official pages reviewed do not document a native branch, model-diff, and restore workflow. | Named branches, model versions, before/after impact, restore, and controlled or approved states. | Alternatives remain comparable and reversible without duplicating opaque project files. |
| Core process engineering | Established batch and continuous simulation, 140+ unit procedures, reactions, VLE, balances, sizing, and costing. | Editable plant graph linking streams, equipment, reactions, balances, physical limits, production modes, and scale assumptions. | The graph is shared by every downstream analysis. SuperPro retains the advantage of a longer-established unit-operation library. |
| Dynamics and uncertainty | Integrated batch calculations; sensitivity, optimization, and Monte Carlo can be driven through COM and external tools. | Native ODE/PDE runs, time trajectories, parameter intervals, sensitivity scenarios, and uncertainty outputs in the project. | Dynamic results stay versioned with their inputs instead of returning from a separate spreadsheet workflow. |
| Scheduling and capacity | Detailed batch Gantt, resource tracking, equipment occupancy, and export to the separate SchedulePro suite. | Batch and campaign scheduling, shared-equipment reuse, CIP/SIP, resources, inventory, and plant utilization linked to the same scenario branch. | Design and capacity decisions change together in one model version. |
| TEA and LCA | Comprehensive economics, costing, environmental assessment, and reports across many formats. | TEA and LCA connected to streams, schedules, evidence grades, intervals, sensitivity, geography, and detailed inventory exports. | Every cost and impact remains traceable to the process branch, source, and review status that produced it. |
| Company data | Extensive databanks, user-defined materials, corporate cost data, and commercial database compatibility. | Bulk CSV, TSV, JSON, and historian-style ingestion with unit mapping, provenance, timestamp, reviewer, and change history. | Imported plant evidence enters a governed review queue before it changes model parameters. |
| Automation and integration | COM/OLE automation through Excel, MATLAB, C#, Python, and other Windows environments. | JSON process model, REST endpoints, Python jobs, webhooks, GitHub integration, and connector registry. | Cloud and company systems can integrate directly without a Windows automation host. |
| CFD and transport | CFD is not listed as a native capability on the official product pages reviewed. | Bioreactor geometry and boundary-condition workflow, interactive transport screening, and external solver job interfaces. | Scale-up risks connect to the process model. Validated 3D CFD still requires a qualified external solver, mesh, convergence, and experimental evidence. |
| Governance and handoff | Comprehensive calculation reports and customizable output formats. | Model status, source lineage, audit history, approval context, detailed Excel/CSV/SVG/JSON/ZIP, and model-readiness gaps. | The output explains what changed, what is missing, and whether the result is decision-ready. |
Download the SuperPro evaluation and reconciliation template (CSV).
Proof before promise
Inspect a reproducible Acatian model before trusting a claim.
The published synthetic CHO fed-batch benchmark executes the same versioned solver used by the application. Inputs, full trajectory, sensitivity runs, schedule, stream table, acceptance criteria, and checksums are downloadable.7 / 7acceptance checks passed
169reported time points
2.67 × 10−7%maximum balance residual
Controlled migration
Benchmark one process against agreed tolerances.
- 01Define the benchmark
Choose one company-owned process and agree tolerances for balances, equipment duty, schedule, economics, and exports.
- 02Reconstruct authorized data
Use your stream tables, equipment basis, assumptions, datasets, and approved results. Acatian does not decode proprietary model files.
- 03Explain every difference
Compare results, evidence, speed, change traceability, collaboration, and missing model scope side by side.
- 04Expand only what passes
Keep the established tool as reference until the Acatian branch meets the agreed technical and governance criteria.
Bring one real process decision.Acatian returns a scoped model, reconciliation record, evidence gaps and a recommendation identifying which parts meet the agreed migration criteria.
Open migration benchmarkBuyer questions
What a technical team should ask before switching.
Is Acatian a SuperPro Designer alternative?
Yes. Acatian covers overlapping bioprocess-engineering work including flowsheets, balances, production modes, scheduling, dynamic models, TEA and LCA. It is a browser-based alternative with a different workflow, not a file-compatible clone. Replace a validated workflow only after one authorized reference model passes agreed acceptance criteria.
What is the main difference between SuperPro Designer and Acatian?
SuperPro Designer is an established Windows desktop process simulator with a broad unit-operation library. Acatian is a shared browser workspace where process models, assumptions, evidence, datasets, branches, simulations, economics, sustainability, comments, and exports remain connected and reviewable.
Can Acatian import SuperPro Designer files?
The model library extracts source labels and diagram geometry from the supplied example archive into editable visual drafts. This is not native simulation compatibility: topology, operating parameters, reactions, costs and numerical equivalence require authorized exports and independent reconciliation.
What should remain in the SuperPro workflow?
SuperPro has a longer commercial track record, a broad established unit-operation library, mature thermodynamic and costing databases, and familiar workflows for experienced users. Keep that workflow where it already meets the project requirements. Evaluate Acatian against agreed criteria for browser collaboration, versioning, data integration, dynamic evidence and cross-functional review.
Who should evaluate Acatian first?
Process-development, MSAT, CDMO, facility-engineering, fermentation, food-biotech, TEA/LCA, and digital-engineering teams whose work currently moves between simulator files, spreadsheets, reports, email, and review meetings.