Printable · GCSE Foundation · ages 14-16
Congruence criteria for triangles worksheet — GCSE Foundation
Fifteen questions on "congruence criteria for triangles" — DfE statement G5. Print it, or print three versions so neighbours cannot copy by letter; the key gives the letter for each version.
Congruence criteria for triangles worksheet — GCSE Foundation
MathsUKwww.geekhero.co.uk
- 1.Triangle ABC has AB = 9 cm, BC = 6 cm and angle A = 35°. Triangle DEF has DE = 9 cm, EF = 6 cm and angle D = 35°. Which of the following correctly identifies the condition shown here?
- 2.In the RHS congruence condition, which three facts must be true about two triangles for RHS to prove they are congruent?
- 3.Triangle ABC has AB = 5 cm, BC = 7 cm and CA = 9 cm. Triangle DEF has DE = 5 cm, EF = 7 cm and FD = 9 cm. Which condition proves the two triangles are congruent?
- 4.Triangle PQR and triangle XYZ have angle P = angle X, angle Q = angle Y and angle R = angle Z, with no side lengths given for either triangle. Which of the following correctly describes the relationship between the two triangles?
- 5.Triangle ABC has AB = 10 cm, BC = 7 cm and angle A = 40°. Triangle DEF has DE = 10 cm, EF = 7 cm and angle D = 40°. Sam says the two triangles are congruent by SAS. Which statement about Sam's claim is correct?
- 6.A carpenter cuts two triangular metal brackets for a shelf. Bracket P has sides of 12 cm, 16 cm and 20 cm. Bracket Q has sides of 16 cm, 20 cm and 12 cm, listed in a different order. Before fitting them as a matching pair, the carpenter wants to check they are exactly the same shape and size. Which of the following correctly justifies this?
- 7.Triangle ABC has AB = 5 cm and BC = 7 cm. Triangle DEF has DE = 5 cm and EF = 7 cm. Which extra fact would prove the triangles are congruent by SAS?
- 8.A roof has two triangular sections, P and Q. Section P has a sloping edge of 3.6 m and a base edge of 2.4 m, with an angle of 70° between them. Section Q has a sloping edge of 3.6 m and a base edge of 2.4 m, with an angle of 70° between them, arranged the same way round. A roofer wants to cut identical triangular felt panels for both sections without measuring Section Q separately. Which condition confirms that the two sections are congruent?
- 9.Triangle ABC has a right angle at B. Triangle DEF has a right angle at E. The hypotenuse of triangle ABC equals the hypotenuse of triangle DEF, and side AB equals side DE. Which condition proves that the two triangles are congruent?
- 10.Triangle ABC has AB = (2x + 3) cm, BC = 11 cm and angle B = 90°. Triangle DEF has DE = 13 cm, EF = 11 cm and angle E = 90°. Given that the two triangles are congruent by SAS, work out the value of x.
- 11.Triangles ABE and CDE share the vertex E, where lines AC and BD cross at E. AE equals CE, and BE equals DE. Angle AEB and angle CED are formed as vertically opposite angles where the lines cross. Which condition proves that triangle ABE is congruent to triangle CDE?
- 12.Triangles PQS and RQS share the common side QS. PQ equals RQ, and PS equals RS. Which condition proves that triangle PQS is congruent to triangle RQS?
- 13.Triangle ABC has AB = 6 cm and BC = 9 cm, with angle A = 40°. Triangle DEF has DE = 6 cm and EF = 9 cm, with angle D = 40°. Meera says these facts prove the triangles are congruent by SAS. Is Meera correct?
- 14.Two triangles are proved congruent using the ASA condition. What can be concluded about the two remaining pairs of corresponding sides that were not part of the original ASA facts?
- 15.Two triangles are congruent to each other. What does this tell you about their angles and sides?
Answer key
- (a) SSA - not sufficient to prove congruence — The angle given, angle A, is not the angle between sides AB and BC — it is not the included angle — so this data is SSA (side, side, angle), which is not sufficient to prove congruence on its own; two triangles can share this SSA information without being congruent. SAS is wrong because the given angle is not the one included between the two given sides. ASA is wrong because only one angle (A) is given, not two. AAS is wrong for the same reason — only one angle is given, not two.
- (b) Right angle, equal hypotenuse, one more side — RHS requires a right angle in each triangle, equal hypotenuses, and one further pair of equal sides, so 'right angle, equal hypotenuse, one more side' is correct. 'Right angle, hypotenuse, one more angle' is wrong because it asks for an extra equal angle instead of an extra equal side, which RHS does not check. 'Two sides and the angle between them' describes SAS, not RHS, so it is wrong. 'Right angle and all three sides equal' describes SSS with an extra right-angle condition, asking for more information than RHS actually needs, so it is wrong.
- (d) SSS - three sides equal — All three pairs of corresponding sides are equal in length (5 cm, 7 cm and 9 cm in both triangles), so the triangles are congruent by SSS. SAS needs an angle to be given as well as two sides, but no angle is given here. ASA needs two angles and the side between them, but no angles are given at all. RHS needs a right angle and the hypotenuse, but no angle is stated to be a right angle.
- (a) Similar, but AAA alone does not prove congruence — Three equal corresponding angles (AAA) show that the two triangles are similar — the same shape — but says nothing about their size, so it does not prove congruence. They could be congruent, or one could simply be an enlargement of the other; without matching side lengths, congruence is not established, so 'congruent because AAA proves congruence' is wrong. Equal angles do not force equal sides — a triangle can be enlarged to any size while keeping the same angles, so that option is also wrong. Something CAN be said here — that the triangles are similar — so 'no relationship can be determined' is wrong too.
- (d) Wrong - the given angle is not the included angle — Sides AB and BC meet at vertex B, so the included angle needed for SAS is angle B, not angle A — the information given is SSA. SSA does not prove congruence: with AB = 10 cm, BC = 7 cm and angle A = 40° there are two different triangles that fit, one with angle C ≈ 74.6° and one with angle C ≈ 105.4°, so Sam's triangles need not be the same shape and size at all. Sam is not correct just because two sides and an angle are equal, since the angle must be the one INCLUDED between those two sides. The condition is not ASA either, because ASA needs two angles, and only one angle is given here. It is also not true that nothing matches — the stated lengths and angle DO match between the two triangles; the problem is which angle was given, not whether the values agree.
- (a) Yes - SSS, the three side lengths all match — Bracket P's sides (12 cm, 16 cm, 20 cm) can each be matched to one of Bracket Q's sides (16 cm, 20 cm, 12 cm) — the same three lengths, just listed differently — so the brackets are congruent by SSS. SAS is wrong here because no angle is stated for either bracket, only three sides. The order the sides are listed in does not matter for SSS — only whether the SET of three lengths matches, and it does, so 'listed in a different order' is not a reason to say no. Nothing extra is needed: SSS proves congruence from side lengths alone, without any angles, so it can be determined.
- (b) angle B = angle E — AB and BC meet at vertex B, so the angle INCLUDED between them is angle B; making angle B = angle E completes SAS. Angle A sits between AB and AC, not between AB and BC, so it is not the included angle needed for SAS here. Angle C sits between BC and CA, not between AB and BC, so it is not included either. AC = DF would give a third pair of equal sides, which proves congruence by SSS instead of SAS.
- (d) SAS — two sides, included angle — Each section has two known sides, 3.6 m and 2.4 m, with the 70° angle between them, matching in both sections; this is exactly the SAS condition, so 'SAS — two sides, included angle' is correct. 'SSS — but only two sides given' is wrong because SSS requires three pairs of equal sides, but only two sides are given for each triangle here. 'ASA — angle between two sides' is wrong because ASA requires two angles with a side between them, but only one angle, 70°, is given, not two. 'Cannot prove — only one angle' is wrong because SAS is specifically designed to prove congruence from exactly two sides and the one angle between them, so no further angle is needed.
- (d) RHS — Both triangles have a right angle, their hypotenuses are equal, and one further pair of sides (AB and DE) are equal, exactly the RHS condition, so RHS is correct. SAS needs two sides and the angle between them; here the right angle at B is not between the hypotenuse and AB, so this is not a valid SAS setup, making SAS wrong. SSS needs three pairs of equal sides, but only two sides are given here, so SSS is wrong. ASA needs two angles and the side between them, but only one angle, the right angle, is given, so ASA is wrong.
- (d) 5 — Method: since the triangles are congruent by SAS, the corresponding sides AB and DE must be equal, because both are the side next to the given right angle that is not BC or EF. Working: AB = DE gives 2x + 3 = 13, so 2x = 10, so x = 5. Options: 10 comes from dropping the coefficient of x and solving x + 3 = 13 instead of 2x + 3 = 13; 4 comes from matching AB to the wrong side, EF, giving 2x + 3 = 11, so 2x = 8, so x = 4; 8 comes from a sign error, solving 2x − 3 = 13 instead of 2x + 3 = 13, giving 2x = 16, so x = 8. Answer: 5.
- (d) SAS, vertically opposite angle included — AE equals CE and BE equals DE give two pairs of equal sides, and angle AEB equals angle CED because they are vertically opposite angles formed where AC and BD cross; vertically opposite angles are always equal without needing to be measured. This included angle sits between the two known sides in each triangle, giving SAS, so 'SAS, vertically opposite angle included' is correct. 'ASA, vertically opposite angle at E' is wrong because ASA needs two pairs of equal angles with the side between them, but only one angle is known in each triangle here, and the two other known facts are sides, not angles. 'SSS, three equal side pairs' is wrong because only two pairs of sides are given; there is no third pair of equal sides. 'Cannot prove — no angle measured' is wrong because vertically opposite angles are always equal automatically when two straight lines cross, so no separate measurement is needed.
- (d) SSS, using shared side QS — PQ equals RQ and PS equals RS are two given pairs of equal sides, and QS is common to both triangles, so QS equals itself and gives a third pair of equal sides. Three pairs of equal sides is exactly the SSS condition, so 'SSS, using shared side QS' is correct. 'SAS, using the angle at Q' is wrong because no angle is given anywhere in this question; angle PQS and angle RQS are not stated to be equal, and assuming they are would be assuming the very thing being proved. 'Only two pairs of sides — not enough' is wrong because it forgets that the shared side QS is itself a third pair of equal sides. 'Cannot prove — no angle given' is wrong because SSS is one of the four basic congruence conditions and specifically requires no angle at all.
- (b) No — the angle given is not the included angle — Method: check whether the given angle sits between the two given sides, since SAS requires the included angle. Working: sides AB and BC meet at vertex B, so the angle between them is angle B — but the angle given is angle A, which is not between the two given sides, and the same mismatch happens in triangle DEF. Options: 'two sides and one angle match' restates SAS's ingredients without checking their positions, which is exactly Meera's mistake; 'SSS needs three equal sides' is a true fact about a different condition, but it is not the reason Meera is wrong here; 'SAS allows any equal angle' states a rule that is not how SAS works, since the angle must be the included one. Answer: no, the angle given is not the included angle.
- (c) They must also be equal — Once two triangles are proved congruent by any condition, including ASA, they are identical in every respect: every pair of corresponding sides and every pair of corresponding angles must be equal, not just the ones originally used to prove the congruence. So the two remaining pairs of corresponding sides must also be equal, making 'they must also be equal' correct. 'They might be equal or not' and 'not enough information to say' both wrongly suggest that congruence only guarantees the specific facts used to prove it, when congruence actually guarantees the triangles are identical overall. 'They must be different' is backwards: the triangles being identical is the entire point of proving congruence, not a reason for a side to differ.
- (d) All angles equal and all sides equal — Congruent triangles are identical in both shape and size, so every corresponding angle is equal and every corresponding side is equal, so 'all angles equal and all sides equal' is correct. 'All angles equal, sides may differ' describes 'similar' triangles, which have equal angles but sides in the same ratio rather than necessarily equal, not congruent ones. 'All sides equal, angles may differ' is not geometrically possible for triangles, since equal sides throughout force the angles to match too. 'Same area, angles and sides may differ' is wrong because equal area alone does not guarantee congruence; two triangles can share an area with completely different shapes.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.