Scan improvements

[je-cook]

Description

This is part of #4308 but starting to split out things that can be reviewed now.
This removes a lot of duplication around scans.

Also there scan variable 14 was not accessible before (i have made it so here). Is that wanted?

Checklist

I confirm that I have completed the following checks:

• My changes follow the PROCESS style guide
• I have justified any large differences in the regression tests caused by this pull request in the comments.
• I have added new tests where appropriate for the changes I have made.
• If I have had to change any existing unit or integration tests, I have justified this change in the pull request comments.
• If I have made documentation changes, I have checked they render correctly.
• I have added documentation for my change, if appropriate.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 34.81675% with 249 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 49.37%. Comparing base (78d50cc) to head (dcb00c8).
⚠️ Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
process/core/io/plot/scans.py	12.50%	203 Missing ⚠️
process/core/scan.py	69.12%	46 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #4482      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   48.73%   49.37%   +0.64%     
==========================================
  Files         151      151              
  Lines       29766    29529     -237     
==========================================
+ Hits        14505    14581      +76     
+ Misses      15261    14948     -313     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[timothy-nunn]

GitHub won't show me process/core/io/plot/scans.py and tbh I've tested that the plotting scripts work as before so I might not both doing a detailed review of it.

[timothy-nunn]

Before:

After:

If we are going to include the variable name instead of the Latex symbol, can we make sure it considers your additional name field. Here the x variable is b_tf_inboard_peak_symmetric

[je-cook]

thats a bug, I think fixed