DETERIORATION OF CONCRETE DUE TO LAUMONTITE AND ITS MECHANISM

Y. Wakizaka*
Geology Research Team, Public Works Research Institute, Tsukuba, Japan

S. Anan
Geology Research Team, Public Works Research Institute, Tsukuba, Japan

ABSTRACT: Laumontite is a harmful mineral for concrete. However, the details and mechanism of deterioration of
concrete due to laumontite are unknown. We carried out two kinds of exposure tests on mortar containing
laumontite-bearing aggregate. As the result, we found that deterioration included popout, cracking and exfoliation.
These deteriorations appeared only in mortar that was affected by rainfall. The degree of deterioration was correlated
with the content of laumontite in aggregate and grain size of laumontite. The degree of deterioration increased for
large content and large size. Observation by a petrographic microscope and a scanning electron microscope (SEM)
and chemical analysis on the deteriorated mortars were done to clarify the mechanism of the deterioration. As a
result, we found radial cracks around laumontite grains. The pattern of these cracks suggests that they were formed
by the expansion of laumontite. Chemical analysis of cement paste around laumontite in the deteriorated mortars
showed that there were no expansive hydration minerals. The results of an expansion test on laumontite showed that
pressure was produced when laumontite became wet. These results indicate that the mechanism of deterioration was
the expansion pressure of laumontite.

INTRODUCTION also described that laumontite was harmful for

Pearson and Loughlin (1923) wrote that laumontite
was not good for concrete. Later, ASTM C 294 (1969)
concluded that laumontite and its dehydration material
leonhardite would need care because there was
volume change between laumontite and leonhardite
due to drying and wetting. In Japan, Ariizumi (1979)
citing the report by Pearson and Loughlin (1923),
reported an example of deterioration of concrete due to
sandstone which contained laumontite as a cementing
material. He believed the cause of the deterioration
was a volume change of 1.5% produced by
laumontite-leonhardite conversion. Shigekura (1981),
Maru and Yanagida (1981), JCI Committee (1988),
Fujii and Kobayashi (1991), and Kawamura (1991)
concrete. However, their recognition of the
harmfulness of laumontite was based on the
observations of the deteriorated concrete in Pearson
and Loughlin (1923), and on literatures by other
authors. The harmfulness of laumontite has been not
confirmed by any experiments. Only Ono et al. (1981)
carried out reaction experiments between laumontite
and calcium, between laumontite in hardened cement
and water, magnesium sulfate, magnesium chloride.
Thus, we conducted many kinds of experiments to
learn what kind of deterioration is induced by
laumontite, and to confirm whether or not mechanism
of the deterioration of concrete is due to volume
change by laumontite- leonhardite conversion.
EXPERIMENTAL

Aggregate for experiments
Diorite was used in laumontite-bearing aggregate
(L-aggregate), whereas granite was used in
laumontite-free aggregate (S-aggregate). Modes of
occurrence of laumontite in diorite are veinlet and
pseudomorph of plagioclase. Fine aggregate was
produced by crushing these rocks under 5 mm. L and
S-aggregate mixed together in specific proportions as
shown in Table 1. L0-aggrgate was composed of pure
L-aggregate.
Aggregate and mortar tests
shrinkage, wetting and drying test and exposure test
were all performed as mortar tests. In the exposure
tests, specimens of mortar were divided into two
groups; one was exposed to rainfall, the other was kept
in containers with covers. Measurements of resonance
vibration by deflection vibration, length change and
weight were made in given age.
Petrographical observation of the exposed mortar
Thin sections of the exposed mortar were observed
through a petrographic microscope.
Observation and chemical and mineralogical analysis
of the exposed mortar by SEM and X-ray
diffractometer

Measurements of cation exchange capacity (CEC),

test for specific gravity and absorption (JIS A 1109) Morphological observation and chemical analysis of
and measurements of laumontite content in the the exposed mortar were carried out with a scanning
aggregate by X-ray diffraction were carried out in electron microscope (SEM; JSE 5310LV) and an
aggregate tests. equipped analyzer (JED2140). Chemical analysis
The proportion of mortar was 0.5 water/cement, and were performed on laumontite in L-aggregate,
2.0 sand/cement. Normal portland cement was used. laumontite in deteriorated mortar, interface between
The mortar which was made from L-aggregate is laumontite and cement paste.
called L-mortar; the mortar made from S-aggregate is The reaction products in the deteriorated mortar
called S-mortar. were analyzed by X-ray diffraction.
A flow test (JIS R 5201), test for time of setting (JIS
A 6204), strength tests (JIS R 5201), test for drying Measurements of expansion pressure of laumontite
crystal
Table 1. Mixing size and proportion of L and S
aggregates for each prepared aggregate. Proportion
is given in weight %. We measured the expansion pressure of laumontite
crystal when the crystal absorbed water. Many single
Prepared Grain size (mm) crystals of laumontite from India were used. We made
Aggregate 5-2.5 2.5-1.2 1.2-0.6 0.6-0.3 0.3-0.15 <0.15 an iron framework with a screw hole in crest and set of
L1 L 15.94 35.68 0 0 0 0
loading plates between the bottom of the framework
S 0 0 16.48 16.48 10.03 5.39
and the screw. Each crystal specimen was putt
L2 L 0 0 26.55 34.48 0 0
S 6.86 16.60 0 0 10.10 5.41
between the loading plates and given a load with the
L3 L 0 0 0 57.69 0 0 screw. The specimen crystal was uni-axially restricted,
S 5.22 12.64 12.64 0 7.69 4.12 while its girth was not restricted. A load meter was set
L4 L 0 0 0 42.87 19.24 0 between the upper loading plate and the screw.
S 5.71 13.83 13.83 0 0 4.52 Measurements were performed under the four cases
L5 L 0 0 0 0 0 12.25 shown in Table 2.
S 9.01 21.82 21.82 21.82 13.28 0
Table 2. Experimental conditions for expansion tests 120 L0, All grain, 30%
100
of laumontite crystals. Rainfall

RDME (%)
80
Not rainfall
60
Experimental Condition Solution Initial Initial state of 40
Case load Aggregate 20
(N/mm2) 0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
1 W & D water 0.23 surface-dry
Exposure time (day)
2 W & D water 0.27 surface-dry
120
3 W & D water 0.14 surface-dry
100
4 Wet water 0.26 surface-dry 80

RDME (%)
W & D: wetting and drying 60
40
EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS 20 L1, 5-1.2mm, 10%
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
Exposure time (day)
110
Properties of aggregate
100

RDME (%)
90
80
CEC was roughly correlated with laumontite content
70 L2, 1.2-0.3mm, 8.5%
in the aggregate. Both S and L-aggregate showed that
60
specific gravity was negatively correlated with 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
Exposure time (day)
absorption. Specific gravity and absorption of both
110
aggregates satisfied the standards for JIS A 5005 100
(specific gravity is more than 2.5; absorption is less 90
RDME (%)

than 3.0). 80
70
60 L3, 0.6-0.3mm, 10%
Properties of mortar 50
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
Exposure time (day)
110
Initial setting time, compressive and flexural strength, 100
RDME (%)

durability against wetting and drying showed no 90

differences between S and L-mortar. Drying shrinkage 80
of L-mortar (―0.15% at 120 days) was greater than 70 L4, 0.6-0.15mm, 10.8%
that of S-mortar (―0.1% at 120 days). Since the flow of 60
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
S-mortar ranged from 179 to 206, and that of L-mortar Exposure time (day)
was 179 to 197, there was almost no difference 110
between the two mortars. The flow of L-mortar was 100
RDME (%)

not correlated with laumontite content in the aggregate. 90

Laumontite did not affect the flow, whereas smectite 80
and biotite reduced it (Wakizaka et al., 2001) 70 L5, <0.15mm, 3.4%
In L0-mortar under rainfall condition after 50 days
60
exposure, deterioration of mortar surface was observed. 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
Deterioration appeared as cracks, exfoliation and pop Exposure time (day)

out. In contrast, the other group of L0-mortar not

exposed to rainfall did not show deterioration. Figure 1 Figure 1. Changes in relative dynamic modulus of
shows changes in the relative dynamic modulus of elasticity (RDME) of mortar in the exposure tests.
elasticity by exposure tests. Relative dynamic modulus
of elasticity of L0-mortar under rainfall condition was
greatly reduced, and mortar collapsed before 500 days.
That of L0-mortar not exposed to rainfall was more
than 80 % before 1,000 to 1,500 days, after which the
modulus was slowly reduced. The degree of
deterioration depended on rainfall conditions.
The degree of deterioration was lower in L1 to
L5-mortar than in the L0-mortar. The difference in
deterioration degree is attributed to the mixing size of
the laumontite; L0-mortar contains laumontite of all
aggregate sizes, whereas L1 to L5-mortar contain
laumontite in one specific aggregate size. The
deterioration degree of mortar due to laumontite may
be correlated with the content and mixing size of
laumontite.
Figure 2 shows the relationship between laumontite
content in aggregate and the relative dynamic modulus
of elasticity at the newest age (2991 to 3310 days after
starting the exposure test). While the correlation
between laumontite contents in aggregate and relative
dynamic modulus of elasticity is not clear, the relative
dynamic modulus of elasticity was reduced by
increasing laumontite, except in L4-mortar.
Figure 3 indicates the relationship between
laumontite mixing size of L1, L3 and L4-mortar
whose laumontite content was about 10 % and relative
dynamic modulus of elasticity was at the newest age.
The reduction in relative dynamic modulus of
elasticity was greatest for large grain size. In Figure 2,
the different tendency of L1-mortar is attributed to its
large laumontite grain size.
120
100 L1, 5-1.2mm
L2, 1.2-0.3mm
RDME   (%)
80 L3, 0.6-0.3mm
L4, 0.6-0.15mm
60
L5, <0.15mm
40 L0, <5mm
20
0 however, these white micro-crystals were observed as
0 10 20 30
Laumonite content (wt%)
Figure 2. Relationship between laumontite content in
aggregate and relative dynamic modulus of elasticity of
mortar in the exposure tests.
100
L1
80 L3
L4
RDME   (%)
60
40
20
0
0.1 1 10
Mixing size of laumontite
(mm)
Figure 3. Relationship between mixing size of
laumontite in aggregate and relative dynamic modulus
of elasticity of mortar in the exposure tests.
Morphology, products and chemical composition of
exposed mortar.
As mentioned earlier, the deterioration that occurred in
L1 to L5-mortar under rainfall condition depended on
the laumontite content and grain size, whereas after
2991 and 3037 days exposure, there were no
reductions of relative dynamic modulus of elasticity,
no change of mortar surface in L1 to L5-mortar not
exposed to rainfall.
Radial cracks were found in cement paste from
laumontite-containing aggregate in deteriorated mortar
using a petrographic microscope (Photograph 1).
Some cracks developed in laumontite grains. Internal
cracks in cement paste were vacant and there were no
reaction products. Microcrystalline calcite was
produced around laumontite with cracks and around
cracks, where these calcite grains indicated the
development of carbonation (Photograph 1b). Calcite
grains were found in some cracks. No cracks were
observed around the laumontite grains in the mortar
not exposed to rainfall.
Laumontite grains in deteriorated mortar seem like
white micro-crystals to the naked eye. Through a SEM,
powdered rectangular parallelepipeds (Photograph 2).
Powdered materials intrude into inter-crystals of
laumontite and into interface between laumontite and
cement paste.
No.1 to 3 in Table 3 show the chemical composition
of laumontite in original rock of aggregate. From these
 a
Laumontite

cracks
cracks

b Photograph 2. Photomicrograph of laumontite in

deteriorated mortar obtained by a SEM.

due to exposure. CaO and K2O were richer in the

Photograph 1. Photomicrograph of deteriorated
mortar. (a): Open nicol. (b): Crossed nicol. Edge of
laumontite grain is lighter than other part.
compositions, the chemical formula of laumontite is
expressed as Ca0.96-0.98K0-0.02Na0-0.03Al2-2.02Si4O12,
which is nearly equal to ideal formula of laumontite
CaAl2Si4O12 ・ 4H2O. No.4 to 9 are chemical
components of laumontite that deteriorated in mortar
laumontite of deteriorated mortar than the original
rock, especially in No.6 located near cement paste,
where Al2O3 was reduced. These changes in chemical
composition suggest that ion exchange occurred
between aluminium ions in the laumontite and
potassium, and calcium ions in the cement paste. The
ion exchange is considered to have occurred in not
deteriorated mortar, because CaO and K2O were
increased in laumontite of No.10, which was not
exposed to rainfall.
We observed powdered material in inter-crystals of
laumontite through a SEM; this powdered material
was confirmed as calcite by its chemical composition.
Monosulfate was produced in a large crack in
laumontite (No.17). CSH-gel with aluminium was

Table 3. Chemical composition of laumontite and hydration products in the L-aggregate in the source
rock and the mortar.

Not
Source rock of Deteriorated Deteriorated
sample deteriorated
L-Aggregate L1-mortar L1-mortar
source L1 mortar
Laumontite Laumontite Laumontite CSH-gel Monosulfate
No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
SiO2 47.96 48.29 47.66 46.86 47.41 43.40 49.73 51.41 48.70 49.83 21.38 29.91 32.83 16.38 21.25 21.57 3.07
TiO2 0.00 0.07 0.21 0.12 0.12 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.07 0.31 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.02
Al2O3 20.24 20.54 20.34 20.42 21.17 16.83 22.79 21.77 20.86 20.29 2.24 5.33 9.88 6.84 4.78 6.91 17.61
Fe2O3 0.74 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.65 0.00 0.57 0.48 0.20 0.51 0.09 0.26 0.51 1.09 1.19
MnO 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.28 0.00 0.47 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.06
MgO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CaO 10.84 10.83 10.85 11.00 11.20 14.68 11.31 11.61 11.85 11.16 34.82 28.29 20.58 39.00 32.75 39.39 36.66
Na2O 0.14 0.18 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.28 0.28 0.10 0.13 0.23 0.00 2.02 0.09 0.00 0.23 0.45 0.01
K2O 0.19 0.00 0.03 0.42 0.47 1.57 0.04 0.26 0.29 0.48 0.07 0.05 0.40 0.64 0.43 0.45 0.12
SO3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.61
Total 80.15 79.91 79.13 79.20 80.65 76.95 85.27 85.60 82.41 82.53 54.49 66.56 64.67 63.43 60.87 69.93 65.55
observed in the interface between powdered 1.5 30

laumontite and cement paste (No.11). While calcite,

Room temperature (ºC)

monosulfate and CSH-gel with aluminium were found

Expansion pressure
1.0 20
in the inter-crystals of laumontite and around

(N/mm 2 )
pressure
laumontite, we did not detect any expansion products temp.
such as alkali-silica gel, ettringite and thaumasite, nor 0.5 10

any special products such as hydrogehlenite,

hydrocalmite and nonocarboalminate, using the SEM.
0 0
X-ray diffraction analysis also indicated that there 0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42
Time (hr)
were no expansion products or special products in the
deteriorated mortar; only normal products such as Figure 4. Change of expansion pressure in repeat of
portlandite and calcite. wetting and drying condition. Dense line shows the
pressure.
Expansion pressure of laumontite crystal

1.5 30

Laumontite-leonhardite conversion is a reversible

Room temperature ( ºC)

reaction with water transfer. Laumontite contains
Expansion pressure

1.0 20
water, whereas leonhardite does not. During this
(N/mm 2)

conversion, the volume of crystal increases when

leonhardite converts to laumontite; volume change is 1 0.5 10

to 2 %. Ariizumi (1979) estimated that this volume

change was the cause of concrete deterioration. It
appeared that the cause of deterioration was expansion
pressure produced by this volume change. Thus, we
measured the expansion pressure of laumontite.
Figure 4 shows the result of case 2 in Table 2. In this
case, initial load was 0.27 N/mm2; after five hours
after starting the experiment, water was added to the
laumontite crystal using a syringe. Pressure was
immediately increased to 0.85 N/mm2 just after water
was add, after its peak pressure slowly decreased. Two
hours after the peak, pressure stabilized at 0.5 N/mm2.
Creep of laumontite crystal caused the reduction of
pressure because the girth of the crystal was not
restricted. If it had been restricted, a higher pressure
could have been obtained. This state was maintained
for 18 hours after starting the experiment, then water
around laumontite crystal was removed and the crystal
was dried with air. Pressure decreased with drying the
crystal to zero at 20 hours. After that, wetting and
drying were repeated, pressure increased to 0.2 N/mm2
when wet, and decreased to zero when dried. In the
second wetting, the lower pressure than the first
wetting is attributed to creep of the crystal.
We got the same results in other cases whose initial
0 0
0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42
Time (hr)
Figure 5. Change of expansion pressure in wetting
condition.
pressure was the equal to the above experiment. In the
case of initial pressure of 0.14 N/mm2, the first
obtained pressure was a low 0.4 N/mm2, but the
second obtained pressure was the same as the first.
Figure 5 shows the results of the case 4 which was
only wetting condition. Initial loading pressure of 0.26
N/mm2 was kept during three hours, then water was
added. Pressure immediately increased just after water
addition to 1.2 N/mm2, after this pressure peak,
pressure moved slowly downward and stabilized at
around 1 N/mm2. When the peak pressure, net
pressure due to laumontite expansion was almost 1
N/mm2: this value was the highest in our experiments.
However, this value may have been higher if the girth
of the crystal had been restricted. The cause of initial
decreasing pressure is considered to be creep of the
crystal. Pressure change after the peak was negatively
correlated with room temperature.
 It is clear that laumontite crystals produce expansion
pressure when the crystals absorb water, and this
expansion pressure is repeatedly yielded in response to
repeated wetting and drying.
DISSCUSSION
Conditions of mortar deterioration due to laumontite
Deterioration of mortar such as cracks, exfoliation and
popout occurred in the group that was exposed to
rainfall, but not in the group which was not exposed to
rainfall except for L0-mortar. This suggests that
deterioration was induced by repeated wetting and
drying. The degree of deterioration is correlated with
content and grain size of laumontite.
Deterioration mechanism based on the morphology of
laumontite and surrounding region
Radial cracks originated from laumontite crystals to
cement paste were observed by a petrographic
microscope. The pattern of these radial cracks
indicates that they originated from the expansion of
laumontite. Internal cracks in the cement paste were
vacant, and no expansion products were detected in
these cracks. According to morphological observation
and mapping of constituent elements, laumontite
crystals were powdered, and microcrystals of calcite
and CSH gel intruded into inter-crystals of laumontite
along cleavages. Thus suggests that the radial cracks
were caused by expansion of laumontite, not by a
chemical reaction.
Deterioration mechanism based on chemical
composition of laumontite and surrounding region
Chemical analysis showed that nomosulfate and
calcite were produced inside large cracks in the
laumontite grains. Calcite and CSH gel containing Al
were detected in the interface between powdered
laumontite and cement paste, but no source materials
for expansion and specific hydration products were
detected. The calcite is considered to be of secondary
origin, formed by following process: pore water
(0which originated from rain) and calcium derived
from cement paste intruded into cracks in laumontite;
after the pore water dried, calcite grains were
deposited. Therefore, the calcite and the carbonated
CSH gel were not the cause of mortar deterioration;
they were formed after cracking. X-ray diffraction
confirmed that there were no source materials for
expansion.
Chemical composition of laumontite in deteriorated
mortar was almost the ideal formula (CaAl2Si4O12・
4H2O) with little increase in potassium and calcium
except in the composition of the interface. In contrast,
aluminium decreased, calcium and potassium
increased in the interface between laumontite and
cement paste. This suggests that ion exchange
occurred between the aluminium of the laumontite and
the calcium, and potassium of the cement paste. The
aluminium from laumontite was absorbed by the
surrounding CSH gel, because the CSH gel contained
aluminium.
While laumontite had ion exchange with cement
paste, this reaction did not produce any source
materials or hydration products of expansion. We thus
concluded that the cause of deterioration due to
laumontite was not a chemical reaction.
Deterioration mechanism based on expansion
pressure of laumontite
While volume change due to laumontite-leonhardite
conversion was well known, no one had known
expansion pressure that accompanied this conversion.
We obtained an expansion pressure of 1 N/mm2,
which occurred repeatedly. Kasami et al. (1982)
investigated popout due to serpentinite, and reported
that the relationship between diameter of aggregate
causing popout (l), depth of the cause aggregate from
mortar surface (d) and popout pressure (p) could be
expressed by the following equation:
P / σt = 11.95 d / l – 0.005
where σt is tensile strength of the mortar. In our other
experiments, compressive strength of L-series mortar
was approximately 69 N/mm2, so tensile strength was
estimated to be about 5.3 N/mm2. The adopted value
of l was 3 mm, which represents the average of the
range (1.2 mm to 5 mm) where the most serious
damage occurred. For a laumontite grain located at 1
mm in depth, the popout pressure was calculated 21
N/mm2. This value was much higher than the obtained
expansion pressure of laumontite. Therefore,
deterioration of mortar due to laumontite such as
popout, exfoliation can not occur only from
expansion; we believe that fatigue failure occurs, as it
is concordant with our results, which were as follows.
Deterioration was observed only in the group that was
exposed to rainfall. Since deterioration was observed
about 50 days after the start of exposure for L0-mortar
and two years for L1-morar, this long term suggests
fatigue failure. Because expansion pressure due to
laumontite was produced repeatedly, this also indicates
the possibility of fatigue failure.
CONCLUSION
To investigate the deterioration of mortar due to
laumontite and its mechanism, we conducted various
kinds of experiments. As the results, we got following
results:
1. Deterioration of mortar was popout, exfoliation
and cracks.
2. Deterioration occurred only with exposure to
rainfall. In this condition, mortar was repeatedly
affected by wetting and drying.
3. Petrographic observation showed that radial
cracks formed from laumontite grains.
4. Chemical analyses done with a SEM detected no
expansion materials in cracks and around
laumontite grains.
5. Expansion pressure of 1N/mm2 was obtained
when a laumontite (leonhardite) crystal was
immersed in water. This expansion pressure
repeatedly occurred.
6. Based on the above results, the mechanism of
mortar deterioration due to laumontite may have
been fatigue failure induced by repeated
laumontite expansion that is repeated wetting and
drying under natural condition.
REFERENCES
Ariizumi, A., 1979. Problems on concrete aggregate.
Jour. Clay Soc. Japan, Vol.19, 41-55. (JwE)
ASTM C 294, 1969. Standard descriptive
nomenclature of constituents of natural mineral
aggregates. 1969 Book of ASTM Standards with
Related Material, Part 10, 219-229.
Fujii, M. and Kobayashi, K., 1991. Recent trend on
aggregate for concrete in our country. Jour. Soc.
Materials Sci. Japan, Vol. 40, 1241-1246. (J)
JCI Committee on Durability Diagnosis of Concrete
Structures, 1988. Proposed JCI standard: Methods for
durability diagnosis of concrete structures (3).
Concrete Jour., Vol. 26, No. 7, 125-137. (J)
Kasami, H., Izumi, I., Shinozaki, M. and Okuno, T.,
1982. Pop-out formation on concrete surfaces caused
by expansion of aggregates. Takenaka Technical
Research Report, No.27, 63-71. (JwE)
Kawamura, M.., 1991. Aggregates and durability of
concrete structures –Effect of deleterious minerals.
Jour. Soc. Materials Sci. Japan, Vol. 40, 1603-1609. (J)
Maru, A. and Yanagida, T., 1981. Selection in concrete
aggregate by petrological and mineralogical or
geological consideration. Concrete Jour. Vol. 19, No.
11, 85-89. (J)
Ono, M., Nagashima, M., and Saito, M., 1981. On
chemical stability of aggregate. Semento Gijutu
Nenpo, Vol. 35, 170-173. (J)
Pearson, J. C. and Loughlin, G. F., 1923. An interesting
case of dangerous aggregate. Proc. American Concrete
Institute, Vol. 19, 142-154.
Shigekura, Y., 1981. Deleterious substances in
aggregates. Concrete Jour. Vol. 19, No. 11, 105-108.
(J)
Wakizaka, Y., Ichikawa, K., Nakamura, Y. and Anan,
S., 2001. Deterioration of concrete due to specific
minerals. Proc. Aggregate 2001 –Environment and
Economy, Vol.2, 331-338.
(J): in Japanese, (JwE): in Japanese with English
abstract.