Printable · GCSE Foundation · ages 14-16

Scale factors, scale diagrams and maps worksheet — GCSE Foundation

Fifteen questions on "scale factors, scale diagrams and maps" — DfE statement R2. 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: Scale factors, scale diagrams and maps worksheet — GCSE Foundation

Maths · GCSE Foundation · R2 · Scale factors, scale diagrams and maps · 15 questions

MathsUKwww.geekhero.co.uk

(b) 1 : 500 — smallest real distance per cm (5 m), most detail — Method: compare what one centimetre represents in real life for each scale — the scale with the smallest real distance per cm shows the most detail. Working: for 1 : 500, 1 cm represents 500 cm (5 m); for 1 : 5000, 1 cm represents 50 m; for 1 : 50 000, 1 cm represents 500 m. Since 5 m is the smallest, 1 : 500 shows the most detail. Wrong options: '1 : 50 000 — covers the largest real area' wrongly assumes covering more area means more detail, when it is the opposite; '1 : 5000 — the middle value' wrongly assumes the middle scale is automatically the most balanced; '1 : 500 — covers the largest real distance' picks the correct scale but states an incorrect fact, since 1 : 500 actually covers the smallest real distance per cm.
(d) 30 cm — Convert 300 m to centimetres: 300 m = 30 000 cm. The scale 1 : 1000 means the map length is the real length divided by 1000: 30 000 ÷ 1000 = 30, giving 30 cm. Dividing the unconverted 300 (metres, not centimetres) by 1000 gives 0.3 cm, far too small to be a real map measurement. Dividing by 10 000 instead of 1 000 gives 3 cm, ten times too small. Multiplying instead of dividing, 300 × 1000 = 300 000, gives 300 000 cm — using the scale the wrong way round, as if the map were bigger than real life.
(d) 1 : 2500 — Method: convert the real-world measurement to the same unit as the drawing (centimetres) before writing the ratio. Working: 25 m = 2500 cm, so the scale is 1 : 2500. Wrong options: 1 : 25 comes from not converting metres to centimetres at all; 1 : 250 comes from converting metres to centimetres using ×10 instead of ×100; 1 : 2.5 comes from converting in the wrong direction (treating 25 m as 2.5 cm).
(c) 70 cm — Method: convert the real length to centimetres, then divide by the scale factor. Working: 84 m = 8400 cm. 8400 ÷ 120 = 70 cm. Wrong options: 0.7 cm comes from dividing 84 by 120 without converting metres to centimetres; 1,008,000 cm comes from multiplying instead of dividing (8400 × 120); 7 cm comes from converting 84 m to 840 cm (using ×10 instead of ×100) before dividing.
(d) 40 cm — Method: convert the real length to centimetres, then divide by the scale factor. Working: 10 m = 1000 cm. 1000 ÷ 25 = 40 cm. Wrong options: 0.4 cm comes from dividing 10 by 25 without converting metres to centimetres first; 25000 cm comes from multiplying instead of dividing (1000 × 25); 4 cm comes from converting 10 m to 100 cm (using ×10 instead of ×100) before dividing.
(a) 1.5 km — Multiply the map length by the scale: 6 × 25 000 = 150 000 cm. Convert to kilometres: 150 000 cm = 1.5 km. Dividing by only 1000 instead of the full conversion when changing units gives 150 km, a hundred times too large. Misreading the scale as 1 : 2500 instead of 1 : 25 000 gives 6 × 2500 = 15 000 cm = 0.15 km, a hundred times too small. Leaving the answer as 150 000 without converting units at all, and calling it 150 000 km, mistakes centimetres for kilometres completely.
(b) 1:200000 — '1 cm represents 2 km' means 1 cm on the map is 2 km in real life. Convert 2 km into centimetres, the same unit as the 1: 2 km = 2000 m = 200 000 cm. So the scale is 1 : 200 000. Converting only as far as metres gives 1 : 2000 — the conversion to centimetres was never finished. Losing a zero in the conversion gives 1 : 20 000, ten times too small. Writing 1 : 2 without converting units at all compares 1 cm to 2 km directly, which is not a valid ratio since the units do not match.
(d) 8 cm — Convert 4 m to centimetres: 4 m = 400 cm. The scale 1 : 50 means the real object is 50 times the plan, so the plan length is the real length divided by 50: 400 ÷ 50 = 8, giving 8 cm. Using the length in metres instead of centimetres, 4 ÷ 50 = 0.08, gives 0.08 cm, far too small to draw. Misplacing a digit in the division gives 80 cm, ten times too big. Multiplying instead of dividing, 400 × 50 = 20 000, gives 20 000 cm — using the scale in the wrong direction, as if going from plan to real life instead of real life to plan.
(d) 90 cm — Method: scale each dimension by the scale factor, then find the perimeter. Working: model height = 240 ÷ 8 = 30 cm; model width = 120 ÷ 8 = 15 cm. Perimeter = 2 × (30 + 15) = 90 cm. Wrong options: 11.25 cm comes from squaring the scale factor as if finding an area (720 ÷ 64); 510 cm comes from scaling only one dimension and leaving the other at full size; 720 cm comes from finding the real perimeter (2 × (240 + 120)) but forgetting to scale it down at all.
(a) 2 km — Method: multiply the map distance by the scale to get the real distance in centimetres, then convert centimetres to kilometres using 100 cm = 1 m and 1000 m = 1 km. Working: 4 × 50 000 = 200 000 cm; 200 000 ÷ 100 = 2000 m; 2000 ÷ 1000 = 2. Answer: 2 km. The distractors: 200 km comes from dividing the 200 000 cm by 1000 in a single step, as if a kilometre were 1000 cm rather than the 100 000 cm it is; 20 km comes from converting to metres correctly, 200 000 ÷ 100 = 2000 m, and then dividing those metres by 100 instead of by 1000; 0.2 km comes from dividing by 1000 to reach metres, as if a metre were 1000 cm, and then dividing by 1000 again, so 200 000 is divided by 1 000 000 altogether.
(a) 12 m² — Real length = 8 × 50 = 400 cm = 4 m. Real width = 6 × 50 = 300 cm = 3 m. Real area = 4 × 3 = 12 m². Scaling the plan area (8 × 6 = 48 cm²) by 50 instead of by 50 squared gives 48 × 50 = 2400 cm² = 0.24 m² — area scales by the square of the length scale factor, not the scale factor itself. Multiplying the real dimensions in centimetres, 400 × 300 = 120 000, and calling the result 120 000 m² mistakes square centimetres for square metres. Converting only the length to metres and leaving the width as 6 (treating centimetres as metres), 4 × 6 = 24, gives 24 m², from a scaling that was never finished.
(c) 5 m — The scale 1 : 100 means 1 cm on the map represents 100 cm in real life. The path is 5 cm on the map, so the real length is 5 × 100 = 500 cm. Convert to metres: 500 cm = 5 m. Dividing instead of multiplying, 5 ÷ 100 = 0.05, gives 0.05 m — the scale must be used to make the real object bigger than the map, not smaller. Leaving the answer as 500 without converting to metres and calling it 500 m mistakes centimetres for metres. Using a scale of 1 : 1000 instead of the given 1 : 100 gives 5 × 1000 = 5000 cm = 50 m, ten times too large.
(c) 27.1 cm — The model length is 20.6 ÷ 76 = 0.271052... metres. Converting to centimetres by multiplying by 100 gives 27.1052..., which rounds to 27.1 cm. Forgetting to convert metres to centimetres leaves the answer as 0.271052... metres, which rounds to 0.3 cm if the unit is simply relabelled. Multiplying by 1000 instead of 100 when converting metres to centimetres gives 271.052..., which rounds to 271.1 cm. Multiplying by 76 instead of dividing, 20.6 × 76 = 1565.6, uses the scale factor the wrong way round — that would be the real length if the model were 20.6 units long, not the other way round.
(b) 5 m — A scale of 1 : 500 means 1 cm on the plan represents 500 cm in real life. Converting to metres: 500 ÷ 100 = 5 m. 500 m comes from forgetting to convert the 500 cm into metres at all. 50 m comes from dividing by 10 instead of 100 when converting centimetres to metres: 500 ÷ 10 = 50. 0.5 m comes from dividing by 1000 instead of 100, as if converting to kilometres instead of metres: 500 ÷ 1000 = 0.5.
(b) 48 m² — Method: lengths are multiplied by the scale factor, but areas are multiplied by its square. Working: 1 cm on the plan stands for 200 cm = 2 m, so 1 cm² on the plan stands for 2 × 2 = 4 m², and 12 × 4 = 48. Answer: 48 m². The distractors: 24 m² comes from scaling the area by the length factor 2 instead of by its square; 2400 m² comes from multiplying the area by the scale 200 as though it were a length; 4800 m² comes from working in centimetres, 12 × 200² = 480 000 cm², and then dividing by 100 instead of by 10 000 to reach square metres.

Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.