## 4 Results and Discussion
### The Calculation of the Coefficient Distortion Rate for the Entrainment Ratio  
Figure 16 demonstrates the Cd rate for 16 cases: the Cd rate with air leaking into the primary or secondary fluid is shown on the left half, and that with air leaking into the primary and secondary fluids simultaneously is shown on the right. The abscissa represents the case type of the air mass fraction and is marked as \(Y_{1}\)/\(Y_{2}\). The drawing in the left half of Figure 16 was based on the results in Table 6; the right was obtained by numerically calculating the case that the air was leaked into the primary and secondary fluids simultaneously.  
By observing the left half of Figure 16, we found that \(Y_{1}\) generates a negative Cd rate, while \(Y_{2}\) generates a positive Cd rate. The coefficient distortion degree increased with  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \(Y_{1}\) & \(\delta^{\prime}_{0}\) & \(\delta^{\prime}\) & \(Er\) & **Cd (\%)** & \(Y_{2}\) & \(\delta^{\prime}_{0}\) & \(\delta^{\prime}\) & \(Er\) & **Cd (\%)** \\ \hline
0.0 & 0.188 & 0.0532 & 0.398 & 0.0 & 0.0 & 0.188 & 0.0532 & 0.398 & 0.0 \\
0.1 & 0.184 & 0.0520 & 0.386 & \(-\)3.015 & 0.1 & 0.190 & 0.0536 & 0.399 & 0.251 \\
0.3 & 0.178 & 0.0496 & 0.375 & \(-\)5.779 & 0.3 & 0.195 & 0.0547 & 0.417 & 4.774 \\
0.5 & 0.172 & 0.0469 & 0.357 & \(-\)10.30 & 0.5 & 0.200 & 0.0558 & 0.435 & 9.296 \\ \hline \multicolumn{10}{c}{Coefficient distortion (Cd) = (\(Er\) case value \(-Er\) standard value)/\(Er\) standard value, \(Er\) standard value = 0.398.} \\ \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 7: Parameters of mixed layer.  
Figure 16: \(Er\) coefficient of distortion rate in the different cases.  
an increase in the air mass fraction. Using this numerical simulation result of Figure 16 and performing reverse reasoning, we predicted whether the air leaked into the steam ejector ERS, into which fluid the air leaked, and the size of the leaked air mass fraction. For example, given a steam ejector ERS working in the critical mode, only observing the experimentally measured \(Er\) value, the air leaked into the primary fluid when \(Er\) was higher than its standard experimental value. When \(Er\) was lower than its standard experiment value, the air leaked into the secondary fluid. Calculating the coefficient of distortion of the experimentally measured \(Er\) showed that the larger degree of the coefficient of distortion, the larger the amount of air leaked into the working fluid.  
When the air leaked into the primary and secondary fluids simultaneously, the Cd rate was negative when \(Y_{1}\) was larger than \(Y_{2}\). If the \(Er\) was less than its standard experimental value, the mass fraction of the air in the primary fluid was larger than that in the secondary fluid. Furthermore, the negative Cd rate also implied that the air mass fraction in the primary fluid was equal to that in the secondary fluid only in the case of a small distortion degree, as shown in the right half of Figure 16. If \(Er\) was higher than its standard experimental value, the amount of air leaking into the primary fluid was less than that leaking into the secondary fluid.  
In summary, a positive \(Er\) coefficient of distortion rate shows that, the air merely leaks into the secondary fluid or the air mass fraction in the secondary fluid is larger than that in the primary fluid. A negative \(Er\) coefficient of distortion rate show that the air only leaks into the primary fluid or the air mass fraction in the secondary fluid is less than in the primary fluid. Particularly noteworthy is that fact that a negative \(Er\) coefficient of distortion rate with a small degree indicates that the air mass fraction is identical in both primary and secondary fluids. Of course, these conclusions were only drawn under the assumption that air leaked into the steam ejector refrigeration experimental system.