Fig.1., Fig.2. and Fig3. showed the results.
To know the value more precisely, I made the plot for the ratio in frequency dependence
Fig.4., Fig.5. and Fig.6 showed the results.
For TM,
previous value f(x) = 1.230
Fitting result [3:5] Hz g(x) = 1.255
For IM,
previous value f(x) = 1.840
Fitting result [3.5:4.5] Hz g(x) = 1.685
For MN,
previous value f(x) = 1.685
Fitting result [3:4] Hz g(x) = 1.803
But, when I set the new value, the lock was not stable due to the 2.7 Hz oscillation became larger.
So, I started the search for the good value for MN.
MN changed from 1.85 to 1.2 with 0.05 step, then 1.455 would be the relatively stable, but keep lock ~ 1 min.
Changed the IM lock from 1.685, but in both cased (increasing and decreasing), lock stability became worse.
If the scaning of actuator efficiency stage by stage isnot working well, we need more systematic way to adjust the hierachical actuator gains.
So, the first thing we need to do is to check the relative phase between TM/IM and IM/MN, and confirm which crossover is problematic.
The easiest way to check it is using calibration functions in diaggui.
You can just simulate the each stage actuators with measured TFs from each TEST filter bank to ALS DARM by putting calibration of each stage LOCK filter.
Then, it is necessary to check crossover frequency and relative phase between stages to confirm which stages are problematic for current hierachical actuators.