The 1978 (over 30 years ago) publication by Jim was largely a regional view (Southern California) using the local terms and calculating methods. The knowledge has been worked into the ACI 530 documents, which reflect the current testing procedures, definitions and nomenclature. Many of the units used were not the commonly seen 2 core units most people see today, but there are some producers that nowo make specialized units to comply with the current codes and standards and the methods to determine the real properties.
I am not aware of any codes that use the old methods and procedures, although the terms and methodology have been updated and adapted to the knowledge the old documents provides.
Just as reality check, the minimum ASTM 12x8x16 units give an approximate equivalent thickness for the unit itself of about 5.8 +or-. The determination of the volume of the units defy calculation (only accurately determined by water submersion) because of the radii, core tapers and various other items (some of which are structural attributes and others are functional/production based. Currently, the term "equivalent thickness" in testing (ASTM C140) is the volume of the unit divides by the actual face area (not including mortar). there may some othe standards that still use the older concepts and determination properties. NCMA TEKs 14-1B (2007 - Properties of Masonry Walls) and TEK 14.7B (2009 - Allowable Stress Design of Concrete Masonry) are several examples of information that is available in Chapter 14 of the TEK notes to use with the common standards.
In general, all design allowables are based on the prism strength (f'm) of a composite 2 high block/mortar hollow prism. Jim Amrheim was very sharp and understood the big picture and the difference is terms locally. In the 1980's, I showed him a series of test reports for 5000 psi 8" hollow prisms and the photographs of the testing and failed samples. It only took him a few seconds to spot the errors in the testing (which others noted later) that involved changes in the ASTM testing procedures that were ultimately corrected to eliminate the older testing and volume/linear dimensions.
How you look at the wall properties is determined by current standards and not older books and papers.
I am partial to ACI 530, since I was involved in the document and the fellow voting members. I have seem some international projects (10 -13 to20 story partially reinforced loadbearing buildings) that were completed with no job site prisms, a minimum of mortar tests and no clean-outs. the engineers said they used what they learned in Southern California in the later 1960's, early 1970's complimented by technology, good detailing, planning and technology. They said they used U.S. standards, but they used them better.
Dick