Title:
Cement-Based Mortar Performance with High Limestone Filler Additions
Author(s):
Andrés A. Torres-Acosta, Brenda V. López-Arias, and Celene Arista-Perrusquía
Publication:
Materials Journal
Volume:
123
Issue:
1
Appears on pages(s):
3-10
Keywords:
carbonation; compressive strength; durability; limestone fillers; mortar
DOI:
10.14359/51749245
Date:
1/1/2026
Abstract:
The cement industry’s strategy in many countries is to reduce its CO2 emissions to diminish the greenhouse effect. This strategy aims to reduce these emissions by decreasing the clinker content in their new formulations, replacing it with supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) or inert fillers. One of the most-used additions in Latin America’s cement industry is inert limestone fillers, which is the most inexpensive one. In North America, there are restrictions on using this inert addition in portland cement, with a maximum allowable content of 15% as limestone content (LSC). Nevertheless, in Latin America and other countries, this limestone filler content restriction is not as strict, allowing contents of up to 35%. This investigation includes experimental results obtained from portland cement mortars where inert limestone fillers were used at a replacement level between 20 and 30% by clinker, and only 24-hour curing was considered. Results obtained include mechanical (compressive strength), physical (electrical resistivity, total void content, and capillary porosity), and chemical (carbonation after 1 year of natural exposure) performance of such mortars. The carbonation coefficients (kCO2) obtained after 1 year of exposure in a natural urban environment were 17.3, 22.9, and 24.5 mm/y1/2 for 23%, 27%, and 29% LSCs, respectively. These results were higher than typical kCO2 values of approximately 4 mm/y1/2 obtained from ordinary portland cement (OPC)-based mortars with a 90 to 95% clinker content, and standard 28-day water curing.
Related References:
1. Torres Acosta, A. A., “Why Does the Concrete Road Infrastructure in the Country Suffer Damage in So Few Years?” Vías Terrestres, Year 13, No. 78, Asociación Mexicana de Ingeniería de Vías Terrestres A.C., July-Aug. 2022, pp. 23-31. (in Spanish)
2. ASTM C150/C150M-22, “Standard Specification for Portland Cement,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2022, 9 pp.
3. NMX-C-414-ONNCCE-2017, “Construction Industry - Hydraulic Cements - Specifications and Test Methods,” National Organization for Standardization and Certification of Construction and Building, S.C. (ONNCCE), Mexico City, Mexico, 2017. (in Spanish)
4. ASTM C114-23, “Standard Test Methods for Chemical Analysis of Hydraulic Cement,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2023, 32 pp.
5. ASTM C33/C33M-23, “Standard Specification for Concrete Aggregates,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2023, 8 pp.
6. ASTM C1437-20, “Standard Test Method for Flow of Hydraulic Cement Mortar,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2020, 2 pp.
7. ASTM C109/C109M-21, “Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Hydraulic Cement Mortars (Using 2-in. or [50 mm] Cube Specimens),” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2021, 12 pp.
8. ASTM C1876-19, “Standard Test Method for Bulk Electrical Resistivity or Bulk Conductivity of Concrete,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2019, 7 pp.
9. NMX-C-515-ONNCCE-2016, “Construction Industry - Hydraulic Concrete - Durability - Determination of Carbonation Depth in Hydraulic Concrete - Specifications and Test Method,” National Organization for Standardization and Certification of Construction and Building, S.C. (ONNCCE), Mexico City, Mexico, 2016. (in Spanish)
10. Mindess, S.; Young, J. F.; and Darwin, D., Concrete, second edition, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2003, 657 pp.
11. Torres-Acosta, A. A.; Méndez-Páramo, R. A.; Arista-Perrusquía, C.; Herrera-Sosa, E. S.; and Reyes-Rodríguez, S., “Portland Cement Paste Performance When Inert Limestone Filler Is Added as Clinker Replacement,” AIMS Materials Science, V. 12, No. 2, 2025, pp. 224-244.
12. Tennis, P. D.; Thomas, M. D. A.; and Weiss, W. J., “State-of-the-Art Report on Use of Limestone in Cements at Levels of up to 15%,” PCA R&D SN3148, American Cement Association, Washington, DC, 2011, 78 pp.
13. University Network of Atmospheric Observatories, “JQRO Atmospheric Observatory,” Juriquilla, Querétaro, Mexico, https://ruoa.unam.mx/estaciones/jqro/. (last accessed Nov. 20, 2025)
14. Fagerlund, G., “Methods of Characterization of Pore Structure,” Report 41, Lund University, Lund, Sweden, 1973, 106 pp.
15. Campos-Silva, A. R., “Concrete Carbonation Study Under Accelerated and Natural Conditions: Application to the Environment of the Metropolitan Area of Monterrey,” MSc thesis, Autonomous University of Nuevo León, San Nicolás de los Garza, Nuevo León, México, 2011. (in Spanish)
16. Torres-Acosta, A. A., and González-Calderón, P. Y., “Mortar with Opuntia Ficus-Indica Mucilage Additions Exposed to CO2-Laden Environment,” ACI Materials Journal, V. 118, No. 5, Sept. 2021, pp. 75-82.
17. Visairo-Méndez, R.; Torres-Acosta, A. A.; and Alvarado-Cárdenas, R., “Durability Performance Indices for Cement-Based Mortars,” Materials, V. 14, No. 11, June 2021, Article No. 2758. doi: 10.3390/ma14112758
18. Torres-Acosta, A. A.; Presuel-Moreno, F.; and Andrade, C., “Electrical Resistivity as Durability Index for Concrete Structures,” ACI Materials Journal, V. 116, No. 6, Nov. 2019, pp. 245-253.
19. ASTM C1202-22, “Standard Test Method for Electrical Indication of Concrete’s Ability to Resist Chloride Ion Penetration,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2022, 8 pp.