## 3 Results and Discussion
### Water Behaviour
From the curves three different drying phases were identified, which correspond to the mechanism of water transport (liquid, vapour or mixed transport) until achieving the surface of the specimens and evaporating. Figure 1: Water absorption curves at 28 days (**a**) and 365 days (**b**). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multirow{2}{*}{**Days**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**MORTARS**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**SWF**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**SWF**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**FBA**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**SWF+FBA**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**SWF+FBA**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**SWF+FBA**} \\ \cline{2-9}  & 28 & 1.45 \(\pm\) 0.03 & 1.58 \(\pm\) 0.10 & 0.78 \(\pm\) 0.01 & 1.50 \(\pm\) 0.10 & 2.03 \(\pm\) 0.10 & 0.89 \(\pm\) 0.12 & 1.25 \(\pm\) 0.07 \\ \hline
**Capillary coefficient** (\(\mathrm{g/m^{2}\cdot m^{0.5}}\)) & 365 & 1.55 \(\pm\) 0.07 & - & - & 1.70 \(\pm\) 0.01 & 1.90 \(\pm\) 0.09 & 1.11 \(\pm\) 0.05 & 1.33 \(\pm\) 0.05 \\ \hline
**Total water absorption** (\(\mathrm{g/m^{2}}\)) & 28 & 17.31 \(\pm\) 0.13 & 21.14 \(\pm\) 0.77 & 24.07 \(\pm\) 0.44 & 17.65 \(\pm\) 0.48 & 239.4 \(\pm\) 0.52 & 16.14 \(\pm\) 0.54 & 19.97 \(\pm\) 0.23 \\ \hline
**Total water absorption** (\(\mathrm{g/m^{2}}\)) & 365 & 17.47 \(\pm\) 0.31 & - & - & 18.00 \(\pm\) 0.28 & 23.53 \(\pm\) 0.80 & 16.79 \(\pm\) 0.36 & 19.87 \(\pm\) 0.22 \\ \hline
**Open porosity** (\%) & 28 & 24.3 \(\pm\) 0.3 & 29.7 \(\pm\) 0.5 & 19.34 \(\pm\) 0.32 & 25.5 \(\pm\) 0.36 \(\pm\) 0.2 & 20.9 \(\pm\) 0.5 & 25.7 \(\pm\) 0.2 \\ \hline
**Dyne rate** & 28 & 0.10 & 0.14 & 0.17 & 0.18 & 0.07 & 0.09 & 0.18 \\ First phase (\(\mathrm{g/m^{2}\cdot h}\)) & 365 & 0.22 & - & - & 0.09 & 0.15 & 0.13 & 0.26 \\ \hline
**Dyne rate** & 28 & 0.76 & 2.03 & 0.96 & 0.92 & 1.13 & 0.73 & 0.54 \\ Second phase (\(\mathrm{g/m^{2}\cdot h^{0.5}}\)) & 365 & 1.42 & - & - & 1.33 & 1.75 & 1.11 & 1.25 \\ \hline
**Drying rate** & 28 & 0.24 & 0.26 & 0.13 & 0.32 & 0.22 & 0.17 & 0.16 \\ \hline Third phase (\(\mathrm{g/m^{2}\cdot h^{0.5}}\)) & 365 & 0.19 & - & - & 0.21 & 0.22 & 0.18 & 0.21 \\ \hline
**Drying index** & 28 & 0.25 & 0.28 & 0.34 & 0.16 & 0.22 & 0.33 & 0.53 \\ \hline
**Reference** & 365 & 0.09 & - & - & 0.09 & 0.08 & 0.10 & 0.23 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Water absorption and open porosity test results. Figure 2 shows that the drying behaviour differed from 28 to 365 days. At early ages, a major difference between the mortars was noticed. At 365 days, the behaviour was similar for all the mortars. At 28 days, the ternary mix mortar (SWF+SWP+FBA) present the worst drying behaviour. It was noticed that the mortar presented a higher drying rate in the first phase (liquid transport) and lower drying rates in the remaining phases (mixed transport--predominantly liquid or predominantly in vapour). From the drying index, which gives a general idea about the drying behaviour, the mortar had more difficulty in drying than the REF mortar, at both ages analysed (Table 2). The incorporation of SWP waste in the SWF+FBA mortar was responsible for a reduction of the pores' diameter, which resulted in slower water absorption, which is favourable in rendering mortars. However, whenever this mortar absorbs a considerable volume of water it has more difficulty in releasing that same amount than a render mortar without wastes (REF mortar). Nevertheless, from 28 days to 365 days, an improvement of the drying behaviour was noticed. SWF+FBA, of the combined wastes' mortars, was the most absorbent one, but it was also the one that dried more easily. SWP+FBA and SWF+SWP+FBA presented lower capillary coefficients, absorbing water slower than REF, but at 28 days they had more difficulty in drying. However, at 365 days, this negative effect was eliminated, and the mortars presented a similar behaviour to the REF mortar. This change of behaviour can be due to a modification of the pore structure of the mortars over time.