Download to read offline
Iterative waterfall model in software engineering.pptx
- 1. Made by –Baldev kaushik Mca 1 Submitted to Mr. Deepesh Kumar Dwivedi, Assistant Professor ITERATIVE WATERFALL MODEL
- 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS Iterative Waterfall Model 03 Introduction 01 The ClassicalWaterfall Model 02 Comparision 04 Conclusion 05
- 3. Introduction Iterative waterfall modelis an extension of Classical Waterfall model, where we have a feedback path to go back to previous completed phases while all the phases stays the same
- 4. The Waterfall Modelis a sequential software development methodology where each phase must be completed before the next begins, with minimal overlap. Waterfall Model
- 5. Phases in Classical Waterfall Model Feasibility Study Requirement Analysis &Specification Design Coding & Unit Testing Integration & System Testing Maintenance
- 6. Iterative Model A variation ofthe Waterfall Model where development flows sequentially, but feedback loops allow some revisiting of previous phases.
- 7. Phases in Iterative Waterfall Model Feasibility Study Requirement Analysis &Specification Design Coding & Unit Testing Integration & System Testing Maintenance
- 8. Comparing Iterative Vs Classical Flow of Phases Strictlysequential; no revisiting phases. Sequential, but allows limited feedback loops to revisit previous phases. Flow of Phases Risk Handling Risks are identified and addressed late, usually during testing or deployment. Flexibility Slightly Flexible; Allows adjustments based on feedback path User Involvement Users can provide feedback at key points, enabling minor adjustments. Risks are addressed earlier by revisiting affected phases during iterations. Risk Handling Highly rigid; Difficult to accommodate to changes Flexibility Minimal user involvement until the testing or deployment phase. User Involvement Classical WF Model Iterative WF Model
- 9. Advatanges & Disadvantages • Simple andeasy to understand. • Clear milestones for project progress. • Works well for smaller projects with well-defined requirements. Disadvatanges Advtantages • Inflexible to changes after the process begins. • Not suitable for complex or evolving projects. • Delayed feedback as testing comes late.
- 10. Conclusions Iterative Waterfall identifies andmitigates risks earlier by revisiting previous phases, if necessary, unlike the Classical Waterfall, which often detects risks late. Classical Waterfall is best suited for projects with clear, stable requirements where minimal changes are expected. The Iterative Waterfall Model improves on the rigidity of the Classical Waterfall Model by introducing limited feedback loops, allowing for minor adjustments during development. iterative Waterfall is better for projects where some flexibility is required to accommodate minor changes or evolving needs.
- 11.