your material uses very, very (much too high for the physics) scaling factors for the flow curve. The single curves are always unscaled as the individual tables are the "raw data". But the global curves are scaled. Because of this, you see this difference. The scaled curves are used for the simulation.
How did you generate the "flow stress vs strain" Excel plot from the simulation results?
If you have an experimental force deflection curve, I propose to compare this to the simulated force deflection curve. (deflection = stroke, but consider the measurement length in the experiment). In the experiment you always have the force deflection curve first. Form there you start to calculate stresses and strains, "engineering" and for the flow curve "true", smoothen, inter- and extraploate, ... and finally getting the flow curve to be used in the simulation. Now the simulation should give the experimental force deflection curve again.
In the simulation the local equivalent v. Mieses stress is less or equal to the flow curve in the material data used. (If no anisotropy, kinematic hardening or other specialties are used.) In friction free test simulations it is possible to get uniform stresses and strains with constant strain rates in the workpiece, which helps to verify this. But no need to do so, this is the math behind our simulation, can not be violated.
Thus if the flow curve in your material is above 200 MPa and your Excel chart starts with roughly 100 MPa, some thing does not match. May be just the temperature. But I can not see this from the information given.
your material uses very, very (much too high for the physics) scaling factors for the flow curve. The single curves are always unscaled as the individual tables are the "raw data". But the global curves are scaled. Because of this, you see this difference. The scaled curves are used for the simulation.
How did you generate the "flow stress vs strain" Excel plot from the simulation results?
If you have an experimental force deflection curve, I propose to compare this to the simulated force deflection curve. (deflection = stroke, but consider the measurement length in the experiment). In the experiment you always have the force deflection curve first. Form there you start to calculate stresses and strains, "engineering" and for the flow curve "true", smoothen, inter- and extraploate, ... and finally getting the flow curve to be used in the simulation. Now the simulation should give the experimental force deflection curve again.
In the simulation the local equivalent v. Mieses stress is less or equal to the flow curve in the material data used. (If no anisotropy, kinematic hardening or other specialties are used.) In friction free test simulations it is possible to get uniform stresses and strains with constant strain rates in the workpiece, which helps to verify this. But no need to do so, this is the math behind our simulation, can not be violated.
Thus if the flow curve in your material is above 200 MPa and your Excel chart starts with roughly 100 MPa, some thing does not match. May be just the temperature. But I can not see this from the information given.
