Enhance ITI accuracy

• Don't ignore the time DC_ConfigureDataForITC takes in RA:
  A totally crazy idea: Why do we not call DC_ConfigureDataForITC(panelTitle,
  DATA_ACQUISITION_MODE) before we start waiting for the ITT elapse? This would
  not require any guessing about the config time from our part we just would have
  to keep separate ITCDataWaves and ITCConfigWaves for DAQ and TP. As we need to
  configure DAQ before TP.
  • GetITCDataWave and friends would get a dataAcqOrTP parameter like
    DC_UpdateGlobals and create the wave either in
    MIES:ITCDevices:ITC18USB_DEV or MIES:ITCDevices:ITC18USB_DEV:TestPulse
  • Most of the code in RA_CounterMD and RA_Counter has to be moved and done
    in RA_HandleITI before we can fill the ITCDataWave for DAQ and before we
    can start TP.
  • In ITC_StartDAQMultiDeviceLowLevel we need to pull out the DC_ConfigureDataForITC calls.
    See also the discussion in PR 459 (AI stash)

Start with RA_HandleITI, RA_CounterMD, RA_Counter, ITC_StartDAQMultiDeviceLowLevel, and the GetITCDataWave functions named in the issue. Read the discussion in PR 459 for context on separating DAQ and TP configuration and data waves. Done means ITC configuration time is handled without guessing and DAQ and TP use the proposed separate waves and sequencing.