## 2 Materials and Methods
### Methods  
Tables 3 and 4 show the experimental design and mixing ratios. For the preparation of the specimens, samples were weighed and mixed for 5 min in a mortar mixer and then poured into two molds: a mold for measuring compressive strength (diameter: 50 mm) and a mold for measuring absorption rate (40 \(\times\) 40 mm), followed by compression molding in a universal material testing machine, applying a compression force of 127 MPa for 6 min. The compression force was removed after removing the water flowing through the mold, as shown in Figure 2, during the compression molding process. The specimens for compressive strength measurement thus prepared underwent preset, steam, and autoclave curing, as shown in Figure 3. The preset curing, an initial hydration process to secure handling strength, was carried out for 12 h at the temperature and relative humidity of 20 \(\pm\) 3 \({}^{\circ}\)C and 60%. Steam curing, a process to secure the volume stability of specimens before autoclave curing, was carried out for 6 h at 60 \({}^{\circ}\)C after raising the temperature at a rate of 20 \({}^{\circ}\)C/h. Autoclave curing was carried out for 5 h at the temperature and relative humidity of 180 \({}^{\circ}\)C and 10 atm after raising the temperature at a rate of 80 \({}^{\circ}\)C/h, followed by natural cooling.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline  & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Physical Properties**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Chemical Properties**} \\ \cline{2-7}  & **Appearance** & **Moisture** & **Color** & **Specific** & **SiO2** & **Fe2O3** \\  & **(wt.\%)** & **(AE)** & **gravity** & **(\%)** & **(ppm)** \\ \hline Quartz & Good & 0.04 & 0.83 & 2.63 & 99.2 & 90 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 2: Properties of Quartz.  
Figure 1: Particle distribution of binder and aggregate.  
Figure 3: Specimen curing temperature gradient.  
Figure 2: Manufacture method of specimen.  
The compressive strength was tested in accordance with KS F 2405(ISO 4012:1978) [18], and the water-absorption rate was calculated by measuring and comparing the mass change between a specimen dried at 100 \(\pm\) 5 \({}^{\circ}\)C until it reached a constant weight and a specimen immersed in water for 48 h. The pore size and distribution were measured with mercury intrusion porosimetry (MIP) using the Micromeritics AutoPore IV9500 system. For pore size calculation, the Washburn equation [19], Equation (1), was used.  
\[r=-\frac{2\gamma\cos\theta}{P} \tag{1}\]  
where, \(r\) is the surface tension of mercury (0.485 N/mm) and \(\theta\) is the contact angle between the mercury and a pore. The mercury contact angle for calculating the pore diameter was assumed to be 130\({}^{\circ}\)[20]. The specimen for pore size and distribution measurements was prepared by drying a sample with a mass of 1-2 g at 100 \(\pm\) 5 \({}^{\circ}\)C for 24 h, and stored in an airtight container after slowly cooling it.  
For quantitative analysis of hydration products, TGA was performed using a thermogravimetric analyzer Pyris 1 TGA (PerkinElmer Inc., Waltham, MA, USA) in a nitrogen (N2) environment at a heating rate of 4.5 \({}^{\circ}\)C/min up to 1000 \({}^{\circ}\)C. For micropore image analysis, hydration products and pore structures were observed with energy dispersive spectroscopy (EDS) using a field emission scanning electron microscope (FE-SEM) (MIRA3-LMH, TES-CAN, Brno, Czech Republic). For mineral analysis, an X-ray diffractometer (Rigaku Mini Flex600, Rigaku Ltd., Tokyo, Japan) was used.