Printable · GCSE Higher · ages 14-16
Congruence criteria for triangles worksheet — GCSE Higher
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.
Congruence criteria for triangles worksheet — GCSE Higher
MathsUKwww.geekhero.co.uk
- 1.Triangle ABC has AB = 6 cm, BC = 8 cm and angle B = 90°. Triangle XYZ has XY = 6 cm, YZ = 8 cm and angle Y = 90°. Which congruence statement correctly shows the matching vertices?
- 2.Triangle ABC and triangle DEF both contain a right angle, at B and E respectively, and the hypotenuses AC and DF are equal in length. Which extra fact would prove the triangles are congruent by RHS?
- 3.An isosceles triangle ABC has AB equal to AC. AM is a line from vertex A, perpendicular to BC, meeting BC at point M. Which condition proves that triangle ABM is congruent to triangle ACM?
- 4.A carpenter measures two triangular braces. Brace 1 has a 55° angle, a 65° angle, and, opposite the 55° angle, a side of 8 cm. Brace 2 has matching 55° and 65° angles and, opposite its 55° angle, a side of 8 cm. The carpenter says that because the equal 8 cm side is not between the two equal angles in either brace, he cannot be sure the two braces are the same size. Is the carpenter correct?
- 5.Two metal window frames are checked before installation. Frame A has edges of 40 cm and 65 cm, with a marked angle of 35° at the far end of the 65 cm edge, away from where the two given edges meet. Frame B has matching edges of 40 cm and 65 cm, with a matching 35° angle in the same position. The fitter wants to know if these measurements alone guarantee the two frames are congruent. What should the fitter be told?
- 6.Triangle ABC has AB = 8 cm, BC = 10 cm and CA = 6 cm. Triangle LMN has LM = 10 cm, MN = 6 cm and NL = 8 cm. The two triangles are congruent by SSS. Which of the following correctly matches the corresponding vertices?
- 7.Triangle ABC has AB = 10 cm, BC = 7 cm and angle A = 40°. Triangle DEF has DE = 10 cm, EF = 7 cm and angle D = 40°. Sam says the two triangles are congruent by SAS. Which statement about Sam's claim is correct?
- 8.A carpenter cuts two triangular metal brackets for a shelf. Bracket P has sides of 12 cm, 16 cm and 20 cm. Bracket Q has sides of 16 cm, 20 cm and 12 cm, listed in a different order. Before fitting them as a matching pair, the carpenter wants to check they are exactly the same shape and size. Which of the following correctly justifies this?
- 9.Two triangles are proved congruent using the ASA condition. What can be concluded about the two remaining pairs of corresponding sides that were not part of the original ASA facts?
- 10.Triangle ABC has AB = 9 cm, BC = 6 cm and angle A = 35°. Triangle DEF has DE = 9 cm, EF = 6 cm and angle D = 35°. Which of the following correctly identifies the condition shown here?
- 11.Triangle ABC has a right angle at B, hypotenuse AC = 13 cm and AB = 5 cm. Triangle DEF has a right angle at E, hypotenuse DF = 13 cm and DE = 5 cm. Which condition proves the two triangles are congruent?
- 12.A roof has two triangular sections, P and Q. Section P has a sloping edge of 3.6 m and a base edge of 2.4 m, with an angle of 70° between them. Section Q has a sloping edge of 3.6 m and a base edge of 2.4 m, with an angle of 70° between them, arranged the same way round. A roofer wants to cut identical triangular felt panels for both sections without measuring Section Q separately. Which condition confirms that the two sections are congruent?
- 13.A landscaper marks out two triangular flower beds using stakes and a tape measure. Bed 1 has two edges of 5 m and 7 m, meeting at a corner with a marked angle of 60° between them. Bed 2 has edges of 5 m and 7 m, meeting at a corner also marked at 60° between them. The landscaper wants to check the two beds will be exactly the same size and shape using only these three measurements. Which condition proves the two beds are congruent?
- 14.Triangle ABC has AB = 6 cm and BC = 9 cm, with angle A = 40°. Triangle DEF has DE = 6 cm and EF = 9 cm, with angle D = 40°. Meera says these facts prove the triangles are congruent by SAS. Is Meera correct?
- 15.Triangles PQS and RQS share the common side QS. PQ equals RQ, and PS equals RS. Which condition proves that triangle PQS is congruent to triangle RQS?
Answer key
- (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) 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.
- (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) 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.
- (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.
- (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.
- (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.
- (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.
- (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) 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.
- (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.
- (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) 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.
- (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.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.