I think it was you who some time ago asked where I got the idea of a 25 digit Royal cubit 0.825 ins x 25 = 20.625.
I never got back on that and should have but busy with work I let it pass. This is important as it relates to your discussion re pi.
This old and very early publication copyrighted in America by the Macmillan Company 64 & 60 fifth avenue, New York. Encyclopaedia Biblica published 1899-1903 page 5,283 yes over 5000 pages as it appears thy did not fool about in those days.
'the simple cubit according to Julian of Ascalon. This 25 finger cubit' A few lines earlier the author writes 'This to argue on the basis of the Royal Egyptian cubit would be .547m. which is nearly a simple hands breadth (.0792 m). '
Which converting to modern inches .547 m = 2153 ins and a note at the bottom of the page (In Egypt the short cubit (450 m or 17.72 inches was similarly 6/7 of the Royal cubit(.525 m or 20.67 ins).'
Where I am heading here is the Bablyonian value for pi 3.125 or 25/8 In Indus Valley measure the foot is 16 digits and the Royal cubit 25.
You seem to have a handle on the cubit measures maybe you can find something.
ps. And yes I agree you can use ratio to discover pi take length 4 / 9 = 0.44444 x 8 = 3.55555 side of square with area of circle diameter 4 using Egyptian value for pi 3.16048
3.55555 / 9 = 0.395061728 (look at the numbers Jacob x 2 = 0.790 123456) x 8 = 3.160493827 side of square the perimeter = circumference of circle. Egyptian value for pi 3.160493827.