We made a measurement of the actuator model installed in CALCS (we have actually done this several times).  (see png attachment).

The second attached plot is a comparison of what we measured to the pyDARM model.  To make the comparison, I multiplied the individual stages by the pyDARM output actProd.calcs2gdsResidActFiltOut_NoDAQDownSample.  This is a filter which contains the corrections to the CALCS model that will be applied in GDS.  There are three versions of the calcs2gds, two versions with _NoDownSample and calcs2gdsResidActFiltOut_NoDAQDownSample_removeCALCSdelay.  

Since the measurement of the total was taken after the delay in CALCS is applied, while the individual stages are measured before the delay, so I applied calcs2gdsResidActFiltOut_NoDAQDownSample_removeCALCSdelay to the total actuation.  

These match up well with the unknown scale factor of 0.95 applied in CALCS, the only remaining thing is a small phase shift in the ESD at around 100 Hz.