Reforming process families – fixed bed variants Which among the following is classically cited as a non-regenerative fixed-bed catalytic reforming process in older refinery classifications?

Introduction / Context:
Catalytic reforming converts low-octane naphtha to high-octane reformate. Historically, several branded technologies existed, differing in reactor configuration and how/when catalyst is regenerated.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• We compare historical labels: Platforming (UOP), Hydroforming (Houdry), Thermofor catalytic reforming (moving-bed), and Hyperforming (Exxon family naming in some texts).
• The classification asked is “non-regenerative fixed-bed” in the legacy exam sense (i.e., not regenerated during on-stream operation).

Concept / Approach:
Older exam keys often describe Platforming as a fixed-bed process that, in its classical semi-regenerative configuration, runs for a cycle and is then shut down for regeneration—hence “non-regenerative” during the on-stream period. In contrast, Thermofor reforming is moving-bed continuous regeneration; Hydroforming is a fixed-bed but classically cyclic with dedicated regeneration steps; Hyperforming references continuous-regeneration lineage.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Legacy refinery training materials frequently group Platforming under fixed-bed units that are regenerated offline at the end of a run.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Hydroforming: Historically cyclic with separate regeneration steps; not classed as “non-regenerative” in the same sense.
• Thermofor catalytic reforming: Moving-bed/continuous regeneration.
• Hyperforming: Typically associated with continuous-regeneration developments.

Common Pitfalls:
Equating “semi-regenerative” with “continuously regenerative.” Semi-regenerative = no on-stream regen, which older notes shorthand as “non-regenerative.”

Final Answer:
Platforming