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.
Answer key: Congruence criteria for triangles worksheet — GCSE Foundation
MathsUKwww.geekhero.co.uk
- (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) 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.
- (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.
- (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.
- (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) 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.
- (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) 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.
- (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.
- (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.
- (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.
- (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.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.