I never mentioned a 'formula'. And its not testing the fire temps at all. More of a visual observation, and then comparison with published charts to give a rough min/max temp estimate of the temp that the steel reached.
But my point was more about the initial production of the charts in the first place, that were used as references. At that stage, if any weird' flakes melting' was seen it would have raised a few eyebrows. But that didn't happen. Thats my point. Heating painted steel in an oven to different temps in order to record the crazing patterns would have bound to include some edge 'flakes' in there. But not a mention of any steel flakes being melted at a temp below their normal point in that oven. Or the paint itself would have to have been rejected as a product hazard itself.
But I did. You're trying to compare unknown unknowns. It's a waste of everybody's time. You also speculate about the results and purpose of the testing without providing any documentation, we're not interested in your opinion, just the facts.
Funny that you deny this is a comparison when you clearly are trying to make some: 'not a mention of any steel flakes being melted'. You're directly trying to compare this kind of test with the type of melting of elements seen in the Harrit test.
But no, to you this is not comparing. LOL, how far the denial goes eh?
Next you guys will be denying that any primer paint is in any of the dust samples... oh wait, you already covered that silly denial! hehe