## 4 Conclusions  
This study primarily compared experimental data from the HIT and CQU wind tunnel laboratories. The results indicate that, in open-circuit wind tunnels, static pressure errors have a significant impact on the mean wind pressure coefficient. Additionally, differences in the turbulence integral scale noticeably affect the results of the RMS wind pressure coefficient, peak factor, and extreme wind pressure coefficient. The specific conclusions are as follows. 1. In the open-circuit wind tunnel, reference static pressure errors can lead to a discrepancy in the mean wind pressure coefficient. This discrepancy can be corrected through indirect measurement experiments. 2. Differences in the ratio of turbulence integral scale to the windward width could lead to variations in the RMS wind pressure coefficient and the extreme wind pressure coefficient. Generally, as this ratio increases, both the RMS wind pressure coefficient and the extreme wind pressure coefficient tend to become larger. 3. The variation of the width-depth ratio makes the leeward surface of the model less affected by the integral scale of turbulence at 90\({}^{\circ}\) wind direction. The purpose of this study is to investigate the differences between various wind tunnel laboratories and provide recommendations to improve the consistency of results. By analyzing discrepancies in experimental outcomes, this research aims to identify key influencing factors and offer guidance for more reliable wind tunnel testing practices. To address the observed discrepancies, it is recommended to implement systematic corrections for reference static pressure errors, as this is a significant source of variation in the mean wind pressure coefficient. Additionally, ensuring the appropriate simulation and consideration of the ratio of turbulence integral scale to windward width is crucial for minimizing differences in RMS and extreme wind pressure coefficients. These measures can help improve the comparability and accuracy of data across different wind tunnel laboratories. However, certain factors remain unexplored in this study, such as differences in instrument accuracy, and environmental influences like temperature and humidity variations. Figure 17: The RMS value of the base overturning force and the base overturning moment of the CAARC building model: (**a**) base overturning force; (**b**) base overturning moment. **Author Contributions:** Writing--original draft preparation, Y.Z. ; writing--review and editing, X.Z. ; funding acquisition and formal analysis, Y.C. ; formal analysis, C.M. and L.W. ; data curation, resource, C.Z. ; Conceptualization, project administration, B.Y. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. **Funding:** This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (52221002, 52278483), 111 Project of China (B18062), Natural Science Foundation of Chongqing, China (cstc2022 ycjh-bgzxm0050), and Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (2024 CDJZCQ-011). **Institutional Review Board Statement:** Not applicable. **Informed Consent Statement:** Not applicable. **Data Availability Statement:** The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding authors. **Conflicts of Interest:** Author [PERSON] was employed by the company China Northeast Architectural Design & Research Institute Co., Ltd. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential no conflict of interest.