Is the Combustion Chamber Volume for a Lamborghini Aventador Really That Small?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the combustion chamber volume of the Lamborghini Aventador, specifically questioning whether the calculated volume of approximately 50 cm³ is accurate and how it relates to the overall engine design. Participants explore the implications of this volume on engine performance and design considerations.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant calculated the combustion chamber volume based on the engine's bore, stroke, and compression ratio, arriving at a value that seemed unexpectedly small.
  • Another participant noted that the small volume could be acceptable if valve timing ensures that valves are closed at top dead center, suggesting that the design might be sound.
  • Some participants discussed the importance of considering additional factors such as piston volume, deck clearance, and gasket volume in the calculation of compression ratio.
  • There were mentions of typical clearances in engine design, with one participant asserting that a clearance of 0.15 cm is common and acceptable for certain piston designs.
  • Another participant highlighted that the piston-to-head clearance could be critical, especially at high RPMs, and that different materials have varying thermal expansion rates that affect clearance needs.
  • Some participants expressed skepticism about the small combustion chamber volume, questioning how it could function effectively in practice.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the implications of the small combustion chamber volume. While some argue that it is feasible under certain conditions, others express doubt about its practicality and the engineering behind it.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention various factors that could influence the calculations, such as the type of piston used and the specific design of the engine, indicating that assumptions about the engine's design may affect the conclusions drawn.

Who May Find This Useful

Individuals interested in automotive engineering, engine design, or performance optimization may find this discussion relevant.

mastermechanic
Messages
107
Reaction score
15
I was analyzing the Lamborghini Aventador's tech. specs. and it is given Bore x Stroke 95mm x 76.4mm and compression ratio 11.8:1. Then I calculated the volume of displacement and it's 541.5 cm^3 for each cylinder. Then I know the compression ratio as $$\frac{V_1 + V_2}{V_2} = C.R$$ $$ V_1=Displacement,$$ $$ V_2 =Combustion Chamber$$

So V_1 = 10.8 V_2 and from here I found the V_2 as 50 cm^3 and divided it by 70.9 cm^2 ( area of the piston) to be able to find the approximate height of combustion chamber. And I got 0.71 cm.

It seemed weird to me, I grabbed a ruler and it's really really small. I couldn't imagine that a combustion chamber can be such small. There is no place even for manifolds to open and close. Where did I make mistake?

Thanks.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
That is not necessarily a mistake because there is essentially no clearance required as long as the valve timing insures that both the inlet and exhaust valves are closed at the piston TDC (top dead center).
 
JBA said:
That is not necessarily a mistake because there is essentially no clearance required as long as the valve timing insures that both the inlet and exhaust valves are closed at the piston TDC (top dead center).
Yeah, but even though there is not, 0.7 cm is pretty small, isn't it? If there is no mistake, Lamborghini engineers did a good job.
 
CR=(D + PV + DC + G + CC) / (PV + DC + G + CC)

you have to find the piston volume, Deck clearance volume, gasket volume as well.
this only works with flat top piston. any piston dome or piston reliefs ( eye brows) will add / subtract from this formula.
 
Or take the quick and dirty route. Assuming flat piston head:

upload_2017-8-20_13-3-6.png
 
mastermechanic said:
Yeah, but even though there is not, 0.7 cm is pretty small, isn't it? If there is no mistake, Lamborghini engineers did a good job.
And that is an average. The closest parts are probably closer to 0.10-0.15 cm apart. And that is cold, with no inertial forces pulling on the piston/connecting rod/crank assembly. The piston is probably almost touching the combustion chamber or valves when in motion.

More info on Quench Quest - Squish, Quench, and Piston-to-Head Clearance
 
Jack is correct
Aluminum flat top piston with steel or cast iron connecting rod should have 0.15 cm or 0.060" clearance. Les will kiss the cylinder head. I built "quench" head engines running this close with no failure but this is the minimum you can use. Aluminum con rods will require more clearance as they will stretch. Do not forget you have two different materials with thermal expansion rates and the physically will " grow longer" due to heat. I ran this combo at 7000-7500 rpm daily with zero failure.
 
910.jpg
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Ranger Mike
mastermechanic said:
Yeah, but even though there is not, 0.7 cm is pretty small, isn't it? If there is no mistake, Lamborghini engineers did a good job.
7mm isn't that small. Bit more than 1/4 inch.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Ranger Mike
  • #10
Knowing the piston to deck height is also important as more than a few engines have pistons "proud" of the deck.
 
  • #11
Howler, true, but usually that will just make up for head gasket thickness.

I'd be fairly certain these heads have quench areas, which are quite close to the piston at TDC... that gives a lot more room everywhere else.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
14K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
23K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
31K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
8K