MariaRD said:

Reporting back for the archive rather than for the thread: I did the narrow version of what was suggested, gave it the full interval, and it settled.

This matches mine closely enough to be worth saying so out loud. Posting only so the count is not one.

MariaRD said:

Reporting back for the archive rather than for the thread: I did the narrow version of what was suggested, gave it the full interval, and it settled.

There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it. The narrow version usually has an answer; the broad version usually does not, and answering the broad one is how a thread stops being useful.

One concrete data point for the thread. Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason. In three months the reason is what you will have forgotten, and the reason is what makes the record worth having.

That is the short version; the long version is somebody else's post.

A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:

What would you measure differently if you were starting again?

kate.chem said:

Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason.

Pushing back on kate.chem here. Filing an objection on the n=1 problem. Personal experience is genuine evidence about one person and very weak evidence about anybody else, and this thread keeps promoting the first into the second.