Well to try to answer all this I'm gonna have to be a pain in the ass as usual, so bare with me and my apologies in advance
If you ask whether you need to separate right now I'd say no, you don't NEED to. But that begs the question of why your are actually attempting to separate in a way. And also why you present a two week plan, so on and so forth.
I know that the question is coming from the whole beginner, intermediate, advanced as told by Rip. Believe me I probably understand all that better than anyone here and I've sort of wrote my own 'book' on it for myself. But you have to realize that when you take these static definitions of beginner, intermediate and so on they may be loosely applicable to an extended population but when you combine it all with a certain programming philosophy it becomes more of a "MODEL" than a training philosophy. So if you're going to suscribe to it you have to subscribe to the whole model.
In other words if you're basing it on do I NEED to as this model would lead you to ask then why are you doing something more complicated than a standard type intermediate 5x5. Because if you think you only need middleground strength and mass stuff then there is not going to be a huge difference between a well run 5x5 and what you are doing now in a way.
I see people trying to "adapt" the definitions into other programs and it just won't work very well. What it comes down to is you are trying to generalize it and while it it may still be very successful as many things can be it is probably no more successfull than sticking to the general model as presented.
Or you can recognize that there is no REAL one size fits all model...there are only very loose and general tendancies. And, in fact, different people have a different interpretation of what a beginner/intermediate versus an advanced trainee needs. For instance while most would agree that 5x5 methods can work well for beginners/intermediates (but it's not the only thing of course) not many would subscribe to the notion that an truly advanced trainee needs to just do more and more volume and can only advance by loading blocks. At least when it comes to strength. Of course strength and mass are intimately related.
So if what you are doing is working for you then I of course say keep doing it. But don't stymie yourself with definitions because you've already chosen to disregard the model so ALL that counts is what happens for you. That is the big problem I've realized with all of this stuff. I've been trying to wrap my head around it and just when I was kinda coming to it Cosgrove made it hit home: This is all about what is supposed to happen, what you expect to happen, what should have happened. BUT ALL THAT MATTERS IS WHAT DOES HAPPEN.
Which should lead to the inevitable conclusion that results count not models.
Do you need to change what you are doing if it is working? Of course not. But you also don't need to worry about someone giving you permission to step out of THEIR box.
As far as my advice goes I actually would not suggest that you start doing heavy single and doubles for you heavy work at this point (as in maximal work) but you can certainly give yourself permission to step out of this sets and reps thing for heavy work. There are many ways to get stronger. But you know there is one that even the most advanced "forum gurus" hardly seem to recognize because we are so caught up in volume, time, density, etc. Well one of the best ways to get stronger is simply to lift heavy shit a bunch of times
.
The reason people don't recognize it is they really never let go of the mass priority. They don't REALLY want to get strong. They want to get big but they want to also be able to impress people with their lifts. This is not accusing you this is to say what we base our learning on. So think about it. You get all these people preaching about getting strong to get big. BUT do they EVER
really do strenght work? NAH. They are caught up in the mass thing and it's all a bunch of empty words when it comes down to it.
A trick for you if you want to experiment...and I can explain how to use it further later on. That heavy bench you just did for 3x5 at 185 pounds. Take what you intend to do for 3x5, add 10 pounds to it and knock out some doubles or triples with it. If that is easy add a little more. With good rest periods. See how many doubles you can do BUT put the emphasis on quality. This is how you keep from overdoing it (one way anyway). You do as many good quality reps as you can using low rep sets with good long rest periods (rest as much as you need). If the technique goes to shit you are done. SO you are lifting a HEAVIER weight MORE times than you would have and you are getting quality volume. This is not maximal work but it is quality and heavier. It won't induce a lot of fatigue especially since you are using more fatigue management than you are now. It is certainly suited to an intermediate because I am only telling you to do what you can do well.
Then you use your volume stuff to accumulate volume and work on hypertrophy.
To manage time you can do some of your supplemental stuff as supersets.
Just an idea. As far as further reading I can't just wave a magic wand and sum that up. It comes from too many different places. But to sort of get an idea on this kind of concept I'd say look up articles by Steven (or Stephan I can't remember) Plisk.