## 3 Results  
### Test 1: Suction Equilibrium Time  
Figure 3 shows the measured suction plots for the soil samples logged by using initially wet (full line) and initially dry sensors (dashed line). In addition, the temperature data recorded by means of the TEROS 21 sensor and the thermocouple during the tests are also reported. The suction measured by means of the TEROS 21 sensor was found to increase with time when the sensor was initially wet (i.e., the water content of the ceramic discs decreased), whereas it was found to decrease with time for the cases when the initially dry sensors were adopted (i.e., the water content of the ceramic discs increased). The highest measured suction with the wet sensor was about 81.7 kPa at a water content of 26.7%, whereas the lowest measured suction was 5.6 kPa at a water content of 41%. Correspondingly, the highest suction measured with the dry sensor was 5 MPa at a water content of 22.1% and the lowest measured suction was 96 kPa at a water content of 41% (Figure 3a). For the high initial water content conditions (w\({}_{i}\) = 41%), both the wet and dry sensors reached equilibrium within the first 24 h, indicating a relatively rapid equilibration process. It is worth highlighting that for the wet sensor, a small increase of 2 kPa was recorded after 30 h, probably due to temperature variation. However, the faster response of the wet sensor can be attributed to the tighter contact of the porous stone with the soil, which facilitates faster equilibration. In the case of the medium initial water content (w\({}_{i}\) = 34-37%), the dry sensors achieved stability first. For both sensors, the equilibrium was achieved at between 24 and 36 h, indicating that the difference in the sensor performance was less pronounced at the medium water content values, and the suction values converged to closer ranges. For a low initial water content (w\({}_{i}\) = 22-28%), stability was reached after 36-48 h, indicating a longer equilibration process. Also, in this latter case, the dry sensors stabilized faster than the wet sensors, and they exhibited higher stable pressure values (although higher noise is recorded to be about \(\pm\)106 kPa), making them more efficient at lower moisture contents. As the initial water content decreased, the time required for sensors to stabilize increased. The wet sensors consistently showed lower stable suction values across all moisture levels compared to the dry sensors. The initial condition of the probes was found to influence the recorded suction, since for the same initial water content of the specimen, the measured suction values at equilibrium were different depending on the initial probe conditions. Considering the highest water content of 41.01%, the final suction values differed by 25 kPa (i.e., the suction measured from the wet sensor differed from the dry sensor of 82.8%), while for the lowest water content (i.e., 24.05%), the suction values differed by a greater value (about 5 MPa). The temperature values recorded by the water potential sensor and the thermocouple during the suction measurements at the different water contents show that the measured temperature fluctuated within \(\pm\)0.5 \({}^{\circ}\)C within a day (Figure 3). During the test, the temperature increased slightly due to the influence of the laboratory's environmental conditions. Furthermore, temperature fluctuations had a minimal impact on the stability ranges, indicating that the stability ranges were primarily influenced by the initial water content rather than the temperature variations. The temperature measured with the TEROS 21 probes was found to range between 17 and 18.6 \({}^{\circ}\)C. In general, in the case of the initially wet sensors, the measured temperature was found to be higher than that measured when adopting the dry probes. However, for the water contents of 22.1%, the temperatures were  
Figure 3: Section measurements over time for all the specimens with six initial water content values adopting both initially wet and dry sensors.