Just for your knowledge: Equivalent Pressure Method is also documented now by ASME VIII-1 Para. UG-44, so that this Method is also an ASME VIII-1 SCREENING approach.

Then, prior to ASME VIII-1 2019 Ed., Equivalent Pressure Method was long time documented by ASME BPVC III-1/NC, Para. 3658.1.

Briefly, this method was initially dedicated to ANSI/ASME B16.5 flanges, to perform a fast and simple SCREENING assessment of non-pressure/piping loads superposed over internal pressure.

NO Reference is made to the ANSI 16.5 flange-type that may be analyzed - it just should be a BOLTED Gasketed Flange, welded or loose-type, intehhral or slip-on etc.

Flange Facing (or Sealing Surface type, as I wrote in my previous message) is considered when GASKET REACTION Diameter "G" .
Please note that "G" IS NOT chosen, IT IS CALCULATED, based on GASKET INNER and OUTER DIAMETERS, and on the Gasket Effective Width "b", which needs also to be calculated/established as function of Basic Seating Width "b0".

And now we arrived at the Facing Type. ANY FACING TYPE (including Tongue and Groove, small or large) CAN BE CONSIDERED AND ANALYZED by equivalent pressure method. You just need to go to ASME VIII-1, Appendix 2 (Sorry, but this Code is everywhere/always required when we calculate ANSI B16.5 flanges traditionally, you cannot avoid that!), Tables 2-5.1 (gasket materials and types) and 2.5-2 (Facing types), to see and DECIDE how to CALCULATE/ESTABLISH "b0". Then you'll CALCULATE "G" diameter as per ASME VIII-1 Appendix 2 methodology.

Finally: Yes, it appears Caesar II database has only RF-type sealing surface and corresponding spiral-wound gasket sizes included, to calculate "G" diameter.
In over 20 years stress analysis work, this case I met for more than 90% of the situations when Equivalent Method was REASONABLE TO BE APPLIED.
Just a personal opinion, Equivalent Pressure method is an overly conservative approach, which becomes ineffective for higher ratings (including and above 600#), when male/female or RTJ facings are typically used.

So, I believe its reasonable and acceptable Caesar II to include only RF facing data. We cannot ask more...

In fact, I really believe it's quite better to let sometimes the engineers to exercise some basic Codes conversational skills, and not to let the software to be handled by "operators", who just push the keyboard, print/save the solution files automatically, without being aware of the Code assessments background.
Anybody who needs to calculate another type of flange facing, just can introduce his/her input "G" value and that's all!

Best regards,