The reliability assessment of hydraulic structures, in primary water defences before 2017, is characterised by exceedance probabilities and implicit uncertainty. In January of 2017, the new water law enforces a change in the assessment of primary water defences. The water law requests a probability of flooding when assessing the safety requirements. The studies of VNK1 and 2 are based on this new safety approach and provide background information and a basis for the new water law. A failure probability and explicit uncertainties provide an increase of reliability in the safety judgement of primary water defences and more specifically hydraulic structures. The aim of a more reliable assessment procedure is to some extent limited by the tools prescribed by the water law. The assessment tool Riskeer does not allow the engineers to have transparency in calculations results, which prevents insight into the model behaviour and contribution to the failure probability. To investigate the mechanics contributing to the overall failure probability for hydraulic structures, analysis of the limit states, failure mechanisms and Riskeer software were performed. The results of the analysis were incorporated into a reference model to validate the suspected mechanics. The input for the reference model was a sensitivity analysis and case study, which cover the assessment tracks of Non-Closure and Strength and Stability for hydraulic structures. The aim of this reference model was not to replace the Riskeer software but describe the mechanics in the correct way. Analysis of the schematisation manual and previous assessment software (Ring toets) provided the incorporated failure mechanisms and the specific model that was used to obtain the limit state. Additionally, a fault tree defined how the different failure mechanisms are related. The knowledge of the fault trees combined with sensitivity analysis provided information about the largest contributors to the overall failure probability, regarding resistance and solicitation variables. The dominant solicitation factor in all failure mechanisms was the water level difference. The resistance factor was dominated by the failure probability of Non-Closure in the gate and the strength of a gate element. In the comparison of the reference model with the Riskeer software, the results were similar but not accurate enough to replace one with another. The reference model was significantly influenced by the approximation in the hydraulic boundary condition, which is formed by assuming a distribution for the water level, wave height and wave period. In the testing of the Riskeer software, the software results showed a difference between two levels of the fault tree. The lower level describes the fault tree including all mechanisms and sub-mechanisms. The top level shows the top probability of the fault tree on which extra simulations of scenarios are executed. The Riskeer software showed the top level as the final result, however, the reference model only describes the lower level. The extra simulations work in a conservative capacity and cannot be assessed by the reference model. The main processes in the fault trees were validated by the reference model, as is shown by their characteristics in the sensitivity analysis. Together with the temporary calculation results, a rough validation of the input parameters was feasible in the lower level. In contrast to the top level, where numerous scenarios were simulated without any transparency to what these values entail. The sensitivity analysis also showed the difference of the two levels over the different variables, which is a (almost constant) significant difference.