Entering mathematical formula

Firstly I'm not sure if this is the correct forum for this question, so apologies.

I am doing a Motorsport Degree at Uni and as part of one of my assignments I've been asked to produce an Excel spreadsheet to show how changes in crank angle affect in-cylinder volume.

The full question that I've been given is as follows:

Based on the equation provided below, produce an excel spreadsheet showing how changes in the crank angle affect the in-cylinder volume. Start from an angle of θ= 180° up to an angle of θ=540° by moving 5° at a time. Produce a graph of the crank angle (θ) vs. volume of cylinder (V)

V = Vcc + 1/4πBē [L+T-(Tcosθ+√(Lē-Tēsinēθ)]

Where:
V = Volume of the cylinder
Vcc = Volume of the combustion chamber
B = Bore
L = Rod Length
T = Throw of the Crankshaft

Basically I'm pretty much clueless as how I will go about entering it into excel as a formula to work out the volume of the cylinder for every 5° the crank angle changes.

If anyone could give me a few steps as to how I would go about it, would appreciate it very much!

Check to make sure all your measurements are in the same units. Also check jj's excel formula carefully to make sure it matches what you are expecting. One error I found was that Excel computes trig functions in radians and you are using degrees. You'll need to convert your degrees to radians. That still doesn't give the answer you are expecting so there must be an error somewhere else.

1/4πBē [L+T-(Tcosθ+√(Lē-Tēsinēθ)]
is that
1/{4πBē [L+T-(Tcosθ+√(Lē-Tēsinēθ)]}
or
(1/(4πBē)* [L+T-(Tcosθ+√(Lē-Tēsinēθ)]
or
(1/4)*πBē*[L+T-(Tcosθ+√(Lē-Tēsinēθ)]

i tried all 3 and still didnt come up with op answer!
ok
i make this bit
(Tcosθ+√(Lē-Tēsinēθ) = 0.115
using
=D2*COS(RADIANS(E2))+SQRT(C2^2-(D2^2*SIN(RADIANS(E2))^2))
where
C2=L
D2=T
E2=θ
now do we agree on that or is my algebra wrong or even excel functions wrong??

Just for fun, i elaborated an example based on Martin's formula in post # 12.
The example works with centimeters and cubic centimeters, because i'm more familiar with those. My conclusion: Martin's formula gives plausible results, the data posted by ju boy in post # 6 do not seem to correspond with his expected result, but again, i'm not too familiar with non-metric data.