Perhaps the ingot does not have a magnetic alignment.
I do not know of any experiments done on the archaeomagnetism of iron objects because for archaeomagnetism to be studies, the object must be in situ since firing. Archaeomagnetism is based on the principle of Thermoremanent magnetism (TRM). When a material containing iron such as clay, is heated to above 700 C (1290 F) the iron particles in the clay align to face magnetic north. The direction and intensity of the magnetism of the kiln or hearth is measured to give the date. I assumed that the same principle would have applied to the crucible steel. All the literature I have read just refers to "iron particles". Perhaps I am wrong and the ingot would not have had a TRM. As I said, I must do some more research on this. I must point out that having TRM and being magnetic are different things. As a side not, I have noticed that many archaeological slags with high iron content and iron lumps, that one side is definitly attracted to a magnete while the other side definitly repels.
Ann