Printable · GCSE Higher · ages 14-16
Geometry and measures worksheet — GCSE Higher
Fifteen questions across the geometry and measures statements at Higher tier. Choose the non-calculator filter to rehearse Paper 1, which counts for a third of the marks.
Answer key: Geometry and measures worksheet — GCSE Higher
MathsUKwww.geekhero.co.uk
- (b) (2, 3) — Applying A first: reflecting (2, 1) in the x-axis gives (2, −1). Applying B to that image: translating (2, −1) by (0, 4) gives (2, −1 + 4) = (2, 3). Applying the transformations in the opposite order — B first, then A — gives a different result: (2, 1) translates to (2, 5), which then reflects to (2, −5); this shows that the order genuinely matters here. Applying only A and stopping there, without the translation, gives (2, −1). Applying only B and stopping there, without the reflection, gives (2, 5). Do both transformations, in the order A then B, and the image of P is (2, 3).
- (c) 0.5 — The real distance is 2 × 25000 = 50000 cm. Converting to metres, by dividing by 100, gives 500 m, and converting to kilometres, by dividing by 1000, gives 0.5 km. A candidate who divides the 50000 cm by 1000 in one go, applying the metres-to-kilometres factor straight to the centimetres, gets 50 km. A candidate who divides by 100 twice, treating 100 m as 1 km, gets 5 km. A candidate who slips one extra decimal place when converting 500 m to kilometres gets 0.05 km. The real distance is 0.5 km.
- (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) 10.5 m² — The area of a trapezium is half of the sum of the parallel sides, multiplied by the width. Add the parallel sides: 2.5 + 4.5 = 7. Multiply by the width: 7 × 3 = 21. Half of 21 is 10.5 m². 21 m² forgets to halve, using the full (2.5+4.5)×3. 3.5 m² averages the two parallel sides, (2.5+4.5)÷2 = 3.5, but forgets to multiply by the width. 6.75 m² treats the bed as a triangle, using only the longer parallel side: half of 4.5 × 3.
- (a) a rounded rectangle: 5 m by 4 m with semicircular ends — Points within 2 m of the straight part of the fence form a rectangle running the 5 m length of the fence and 4 m wide (2 m on each side); points within 2 m of each END of the fence, beyond that rectangle, form a semicircle of radius 2 m there, since the nearest point of the fence to them is just that one end. Together this gives a rounded, stadium-shaped region. "a rectangle, 9 m by 4 m" extends the rectangle by 2 m at each end instead of rounding it, wrongly including corner points that are actually more than 2 m from every part of the fence. "a circle of radius 2 m" treats the whole 5 m fence as a single point. "a rectangle, 5 m by 2 m" uses 2 m as the full width instead of the distance on EACH side, so it only covers one side of the fence.
- (b) x = 5 — Every point on a vertical line has the same x-coordinate, so the equation of a vertical line through (5, 2) is x = 5. "y = 5" mixes up the coordinates, using the x-value of 5 to write a y-equation. "y = 2" is the equation of the horizontal line through (5, 2), not the vertical one. "x = 2" uses the correct letter but the wrong coordinate, the y-value of 2 instead of the x-value of 5.
- (c) (10.5, −2) — Method: the vector from the first tile to the third tile is the pattern's vector doubled, since two translations happen between them. Working: doubling (4.5, −2.5) gives (9, −5); adding this to the starting corner (1.5, 3) gives x-coordinate 1.5 + 9 = 10.5 and y-coordinate 3 − 5 = −2. Answer: (10.5, −2). A candidate who only applies the vector once, translating to the second tile instead of the third, gets (6, 0.5). A candidate who adds 2.5 instead of subtracting it in the y-coordinate gets (10.5, 8). A candidate who doubles the x-part of the vector correctly but forgets to change the y-coordinate at all gets (10.5, 3).
- (a) 0.1 m — Method: the sloping surface is the hypotenuse and the vertical rise is the side opposite the 30° angle, so rise = 4.8 × sin 30°; then compare that rise with the limit. Working: the exact value of sin 30° is one half, so the rise = 4.8 × 1/2 = 2.4 m. The limit is 2.5 m, and 2.5 − 2.4 = 0.1. Answer: the ramp is 0.1 m below the limit. Working out the rise and stopping there gives 2.4 m, which answers a question that was not asked. Dividing by sin 30° instead of multiplying gives 4.8 ÷ 0.5 = 9.6 and then 9.6 − 2.5 = 7.1 m. Treating sine as proportional to the angle, so that sin 30° is a third of sin 90°, gives 4.8 ÷ 3 = 1.6 and then 2.5 − 1.6 = 0.9 m.
- (a) Reflex + non-reflex angle BOD = 360°, so 2a + 2c = 360°. — A correct proof must build in a strictly logical order: the reflex and non-reflex angles at O, which together make a complete turn about the centre, must be added to 360° before 2a and 2c can be combined and divided. The statement 'Reflex + non-reflex angle BOD = 360°, so 2a + 2c = 360°' is the only one that follows directly from having 2a and 2c already established, and it is exactly what is needed before the final division step. Jumping straight to 'Divide by 2 throughout to get a + c = 180°' skips the step that justifies why 2a + 2c equals 360° in the first place — there is nothing yet to divide. Repeating 'Angle BOD is 2a and 2c, by the centre theorem' does not move the proof forward at all, since that fact has already been established in the sentence given. Introducing 'OB = OD are radii, so triangle OBD is isosceles' brings in an unrelated triangle and an unrelated method that plays no part in this particular proof.
- (a) 1 : 8 — Method: in similar solids the ratio of the volumes is the cube of the ratio of corresponding lengths. Working: the heights are in the ratio 1 : 2, so the volumes are in the ratio 1³ : 2³ = 1 : 8. Answer: 1 : 8. The distractors: 1 : 2 leaves the height ratio unchanged, as though a volume scaled in the same way as a length; 1 : 4 comes from squaring, 1² : 2², which is the rule for surface areas and not for volumes; 1 : 6 comes from multiplying each part by 3 instead of raising each part to the power 3.
- (a) 9 — AB is a vertical segment, since A and B share the x-coordinate 1, and its length is the difference in y-coordinates: 5 − 1 = 4. BC is a horizontal segment, since B and C share the y-coordinate 5, and its length is the difference in x-coordinates: 6 − 1 = 5. The total path length is 4 + 5 = 9. 20 comes from multiplying the two lengths, 4 × 5, instead of adding them. 5 is only the length of BC, forgetting to include AB. 4 is only the length of AB, forgetting to include BC.
- (d) 16 — Method: use the scale to find the real length and width separately, then use the perimeter formula. Working: real length = 4 cm × 125 = 500 cm = 5 m; real width = 2.4 cm × 125 = 300 cm = 3 m; perimeter = 2 × (5 + 3) = 16 m. A student who answers 8 has added the real length and width but forgotten to double the total for the perimeter. A student who answers 1600 has correctly worked out the perimeter in centimetres but forgotten to convert it to metres. A student who answers 500 has only converted the length to real centimetres and stopped there, ignoring the width and the perimeter step. Answer: 16 m.
- (a) 17 cm — Convert the real distance to centimetres first: 3.4 km = 340 000 cm. Then divide by the scale factor, 20 000, since the map is 20 000 times smaller than real life: 340 000 ÷ 20 000 = 17, so the map distance is 17 cm. Choosing 1700 cm divides by 200 instead of 20 000, losing two zeros from the scale factor (340 000 ÷ 200 = 1700). Choosing 170 cm divides by 2 000 instead of 20 000, losing one zero from the scale factor (340 000 ÷ 2 000 = 170). Choosing 0.17 cm divides by 2 000 000 instead of 20 000, adding two extra zeros to the scale factor (340 000 ÷ 2 000 000 = 0.17).
- (d) 12 cm — Since DE is parallel to BC, triangle ADE is similar to triangle ABC (the two triangles share angle A, and the parallel lines make the angles at D and E equal to the angles at B and C). The whole side AB = AD + DB = 3 + 6 = 9 cm. The scale factor from the small triangle to the large triangle is AB ÷ AD = 9 ÷ 3 = 3, so BC = DE × 3 = 4 × 3 = 12 cm. Scaling by DB ÷ AD instead of AB ÷ AD gives 4 × (6 ÷ 3) = 8 cm. Adding DB directly onto DE, instead of scaling, gives 4 + 6 = 10 cm. Treating the triangles as congruent rather than similar, so assuming corresponding sides are simply equal, gives BC = DE = 4 cm.
- (a) 67° — PA and PB are tangents from the same point, so OAPB is a kite with right angles at A and B, by the tangent–radius theorem. The kite's angles sum to 360°, so angle AOB = 360° − 90° − 90° − 46° = 134°. C is on the major arc AB, so by the angle at the centre theorem, angle ACB = 134° ÷ 2 = 67°. Doubling angle APB instead of first finding angle AOB from the kite gives 46° + 46° = 92°. Using angle APB directly as if it were the centre angle, then halving it, gives 46° ÷ 2 = 23°. Finding angle AOB = 134° correctly but forgetting to halve it for the angle at the circumference gives 134°. Halve angle AOB, once you've found it properly, and you get 67°.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.