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

(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.
(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.
(d) ASA - two angles and the included side equal — Two angles (A and B) are given, and AB is the side between them, so this is ASA. SAS needs two sides and the angle between them, but only one side is given. AAS also uses two angles and a side, but the side must NOT be between the two angles — here AB is between angle A and angle B, so it is ASA, not AAS. RHS needs a right angle, and neither 40° nor 65° is 90°.
(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) 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) 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) 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.
(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.
(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) 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) 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) 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.
(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) 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) SAS — Method: check which condition matches two sides and the angle between them, since that is what has been measured for each bed. Working: the 60° angle is marked at the corner where the 5 m and 7 m edges meet, so it is the included angle — this is two Sides and the included Angle, SAS. Options: SSS would need a third side measured, but only two edges are known; ASA would need two angles and the side between them, but only one angle is measured; RHS needs a right angle, and 60° is not a right angle. Answer: SAS.

Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.