## 3 Results
### Results for Complex Thermal Analysis  
A complex thermal analysis allowed us to identify temperature variations (via differential thermal analysis (DTA)), variations in enthalpy (via differential scanning calorimetry (DSC)), mass changes (via thermogravimetry (TG)), and derivative thermogravimetry (via DTG) [32].  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline
**Sample** & **Element** & **\% Mass** & **\% Atomic** \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{1} & C & 7.4 & 11.21 \\  & O & 56.26 & 66.29 \\  & Na & 1.88 & 1.54 \\  & Mg & 1.76 & 1.36 \\  & Al & 4.41 & 3.08 \\  & Si & 16.12 & 10.82 \\  & K & 0.76 & 0.37 \\  & Ca & 10.48 & 4.93 \\  & Fe & 1.19 & 0.4 \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{2a} & C & 10.14 & 15.45 \\  & O & 58.97 & 67.47 \\  & Na & 2.34 & 1.86 \\  & Mg & 1.89 & 1.42 \\  & Al & 2.04 & 1.38 \\  & Si & 5.86 & 3.82 \\  & P & 0.53 & 0.32 \\  & K & 0.38 & 0.18 \\  & Ca & 17.36 & 7.93 \\  & Fe & 0.49 & 0.16 \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{2b} & C & 13.63 & 19.77 \\  & O & 59.85 & 65.21 \\  & Na & 2.73 & 2.07 \\  & Mg & 1.62 & 1.16 \\  & Al & 2.33 & 1.51 \\  & Si & 9.16 & 5.68 \\  & K & 0.18 & 0.08 \\  & Ca & 10.09 & 4.39 \\  & Fe & 0.41 & 0.13 \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{3} & C & 9.3 & 14.65 \\  & O & 56.61 & 66.96 \\  & Na & 2.68 & 2.2 \\  & Al & 1.19 & 0.83 \\  & Si & 5.58 & 3.76 \\  & K & 0.16 & 0.08 \\  & Ca & 24.15 & 11.4 \\  & Fe & 0.34 & 0.12 \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{4} & C & 9.36 & 14.77 \\  & O & 55.06 & 65.22 \\  & Na & 2.92 & 2.4 \\  & Mg & 1.22 & 0.95 \\  & Al & 2.07 & 1.46 \\  & Si & 6.8 & 4.59 \\  & K & 0.29 & 0.14 \\  & Ca & 21.77 & 10.3 \\  & Fe & 0.51 & 0.17 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 4: The elemental composition of investigated mortar samples.  
The hydraulicity of the mortars from the collected samples could also be evaluated through simultaneous thermal analyses (thermogravimetry and differential dynamic calorimetry) [39; 40; 41; 42].  
The matrix of the investigated mortars was composed of fine aggregates and binder material and exhibited a uniform structure, indicating thorough mixing. [PERSON] et al. [38] suggested that such a matrix may facilitate the formation of hydrosilicate gel formations through the reaction between lime/calcium carbonate and fine pozzolanic aggregates. The formation of these compounds would ensure strong adhesive bonds, leading to the production of a durable and rigid mortar.  
Figure 13 presents the thermogravimetric (TG) curves, differential thermogravimetric (DTG) curves, and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) curves obtained for the collected mortars through complex thermal analysis.  
Table 5 presents the results obtained from the interpretation of the data shown in Figure 13 for the three thermal parameters: mass loss (%), enthalpy variation--\(\Delta\)H (J/g), and peak temperature during thermal decomposition--t (\({}^{\circ}\)C), for the five collected mortar samples.  
The thermogravimetric analysis (TG-DTG) revealed a total mass loss in the investigated mortars ranging from 12.89% to 18.87%, as well as the presence of endothermic effects. The mass losses within the temperature range of 30-625 \({}^{\circ}\)C were attributed to processes involving the loss of physically bound water (hygroscopic water) and the loss of structurally bound (chemical) water in the hydraulic components. The mass loss in the temperature range of 625-900 \({}^{\circ}\)C was attributed to the decomposition of calcite [40; 41; 42; 43].  
Figure 13: Thermal analysis of for: (**a**) Sample 1; (**b**) Sample 2a; (**c**) Sample 2b; (**d**) Sample 3; (**e**) Sample 4.  
To assess the hydraulicity of the mortars from the collected samples, the ratio between the percentage of carbon dioxide and chemically bound water (CO\({}_{2}\)/H\({}_{2}\)O) was calculated, and the distribution of CO\({}_{2}\)/H\({}_{2}\)O ratios was plotted as a function of the %CO\({}_{2}\) released during the decarbonation process (Figure 14).