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.
Non-calculator
Answer key: Congruence criteria for triangles worksheet — GCSE Foundation
MathsUKwww.geekhero.co.uk
- (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) AB = DE — RHS needs a right angle, the hypotenuse, and one OTHER side to be equal; the right angles and hypotenuses are already equal, so a matching pair of the remaining sides, AB = DE, completes RHS. Angle A = angle D is an extra ANGLE fact, not the extra SIDE fact that RHS specifically requires. AC being parallel to DF says nothing about either triangle's side lengths, so it cannot complete a congruence condition. Being drawn the same way up is about orientation on the page, not about any measurement, so it proves nothing about congruence.
- (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) 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.
- (c) SAS - two sides and the included angle equal — Two sides (AB and BC) and the angle between them (angle B) are equal in both triangles, so this is SAS. SSS would need all three sides given, but only two sides are stated. ASA needs two angles and the side between them, but only one angle is given. AAS needs two angles and a side, but again only one angle is given here.
- (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.
- (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.
- (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.
- (c) A↔N, B↔L, C↔M (ABC≅NLM) — Matching equal side lengths: AB (8 cm) equals NL (8 cm), BC (10 cm) equals LM (10 cm), and CA (6 cm) equals MN (6 cm). This gives the correspondence A with N, B with L, and C with M, so triangle ABC is congruent to triangle NLM, making 'A↔N, B↔L, C↔M (ABC≅NLM)' correct. 'A↔L, B↔M, C↔N (ABC≅LMN)' simply matches the vertices in the order they are written without checking the side lengths: AB (8 cm) would need to equal LM (10 cm), which is false. 'A↔M, B↔N, C↔L (ABC≅MNL)' also fails this check, since AB (8 cm) would need to equal MN (6 cm), which is false. 'A↔N, B↔M, C↔L (ABC≅NML)' gets A correct but swaps B and C, so AB (8 cm) would need to equal NM (6 cm), which is also false.
- (b) RHS - right angle, hypotenuse and one side equal — A right angle, the hypotenuse (13 cm) and one other side (5 cm) are equal in both triangles, so this is RHS. SAS would need the equal angle to be the one INCLUDED between the two equal sides, but the right angle at B is not between AB and the hypotenuse AC — it is opposite the hypotenuse instead, so SAS does not apply directly here. SSS needs all three sides, but only two sides are stated. ASA needs two angles, but only one angle (the right angle) is given.
- (c) SSA — Method: recall the four basic congruence criteria for triangles and compare them with each option. Working: the four basic conditions are SSS, SAS, ASA and RHS. SSA (two sides and a non-included angle) is not one of them, because knowing two sides and an angle that is not between them does not always fix a unique triangle. Options: SSS, ASA and RHS are each genuine congruence conditions, so none of them is the correct answer to 'which is NOT'. Answer: SSA.
- (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.
- (a) No — the angle is not between the two sides — Method: check whether the given angle sits between the two given sides. Working: the 35° angle is marked away from the corner where the 40 cm and 65 cm edges meet, so it is not the included angle — this is SSA, which is not one of the four basic congruence conditions, so it does not guarantee congruence. Options: 'Yes — SAS' wrongly treats any two sides plus any angle as SAS, without checking the angle's position; 'Yes — SSS' wrongly counts the angle as if it were a third side; 'No — only two sides measured' is not the real reason, since SAS itself only needs two sides, so this reasoning is beside the point. Answer: no, the angle is not between the two sides.
- (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.
- (a) Two sides equal, with the angle between them equal — Method: recall what each letter in SAS stands for, and the order they must appear in. Working: SAS stands for Side, Angle, Side — two pairs of equal sides, with the equal angle positioned between them. Options: 'two sides and any one angle' describes SSA, which is not valid, since the angle must specifically be the included one; 'two angles with the side between them' describes ASA, a different condition; 'all three pairs of sides' describes SSS, also different. Answer: two sides equal, with the angle between them equal.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.