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.

VersionsA only A + B A + B + Csame questions, different order

AnswersQuestions only With answer key Key only

CalculatorMixed Non-calculator (Paper 1)Calculator (Papers 2 and 3)

New sheet

Answer key: Congruence criteria for triangles worksheet — GCSE Foundation

Maths · GCSE Foundation · G5 · Congruence criteria for triangles · 15 questions

MathsUKwww.geekhero.co.uk

(c) ASA — Method: check which condition matches two angles and the side between them, since that is all the sailmaker has measured. Working: the 10 m side lies between the 50° and 75° angles in both panels, so this is two Angles and the included Side, ASA. Options: SAS would need two sides and the angle between them, but only one side has been measured here; SSS would need three sides, but only one is known; RHS needs a right angle and a hypotenuse, and neither panel has a stated right angle. Answer: ASA.
(d) RHS, using AM as common side — Triangle ABM and triangle ACM both have a right angle at M, since AM is perpendicular to BC. AB and AC are the hypotenuses of the two triangles and are equal, and AM is a side common to both triangles, giving a right angle, equal hypotenuses and one further equal side, exactly RHS, so 'RHS, using AM as common side' is correct. 'SAS, right angle as included angle' wrongly treats the right angle at M as included between AB and AM, but AB is the hypotenuse, not one of the two sides forming that right angle. 'SSS, using BM = CM as a fact' wrongly assumes BM equals CM as a given fact, when this is only true because of the RHS congruence, not before it, so it cannot be used to prove that congruence. 'ASA, AB as the included side' again wrongly labels a side as if it could sit between two angles when only one angle, the right angle, is actually known.
(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) 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) No — third angle is also fixed — Since both braces have angles of 55° and 65°, their third angles must both be 60°, because angles in a triangle sum to 180°. All three angles now match, so the braces have the same shape. Both 8 cm sides lie in the same position relative to those angles — opposite the 55° angle in each brace — so one matching pair of corresponding sides fixes the size as well, exactly as ASA or AAS would. The braces are therefore guaranteed to be congruent and the carpenter is incorrect: 'No — third angle is also fixed' is correct. 'Yes — side must be included' is wrong because the side does not have to lie physically between the two named angles; once the third angle is fixed, a corresponding equal side anywhere is enough. 'No — any two angles enough alone' is wrong because two equal angles with no side length at all would only show the triangles are similar, not congruent. 'Yes — third angle may differ' is wrong because the third angle is fixed at 60° by the angle sum and cannot vary.
(c) ABC ≅ XYZ — Method: match each vertex in ABC to its corresponding vertex in XYZ, using the equal sides and angles given, then write the letters in that matching order. Working: AB matches XY, BC matches YZ, and angle B matches angle Y, so A corresponds to X, B corresponds to Y, and C corresponds to Z, giving ABC ≅ XYZ. Options: 'ABC ≅ ZYX' puts Z in A's position, but A corresponds to X, not Z; 'ABC ≅ YXZ' puts Y in A's position, but A corresponds to X; 'ABC ≅ ZXY' puts Z in A's position and X in B's position, neither of which is correct. Answer: ABC ≅ XYZ.
(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.
(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.
(c) RHS — Method: check which basic congruence condition matches the facts given — a right angle, the hypotenuse, and one other side, in both triangles. Working: both triangles have a right angle (at M and Q), the hypotenuse is given for both (LN = PR = 15 cm), and one other side is given for both (LM = PQ = 9 cm) — this is exactly Right angle, Hypotenuse, Side. Options: SAS would need the given angle to sit between the two given sides, but the right angle at M is not between LM and LN, since LN is the hypotenuse, opposite the right angle; SSS would need three sides given in each triangle, but only two sides are known here; ASA would need two angles and the side between them, but only one angle is given. Answer: RHS.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.

Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.