Measuring Phase Lag & Magnitude of Voltage Across Rock Sample 0.01–1000 Hz Signal Processing

Geologist here, looking for advice on setting up an experiment that will need to utilize signal processing. I apologize if this is not the right place to ask this question but I could really use the help!
I’m looking to setup an experiment where I measure the phase lag and magnitude of a voltage waveform across a sample of rock relative to the injected current waveform. This measurement will need to be repeated at discrete frequencies ranging from 0.01 Hz – 1000 Hz.
A sample holder will hold the sample of rock(s) and current will be injected at the end of the sample holder through an electrode. The voltage difference will be measured by potential electrodes located along the body of the sample. My plan is to compare the signal from the potential electrodes to the current waveform recorded on a reference resistor.
My questions is what is the easiest way to set up this study? From what I was able to gather from searching on Google and YouTube is I may be able to use something as simple as an oscilloscope – waveform generator combo or I may need to get complex and use some sort of digital signal analyzer that connects to a computer running LABView.
I’ve attached some figures that may help explain what I am looking for. Like I said I am pretty inexperienced to all of this so I’m not sure which setup will be easier for someone like me. Anything anyone is able to give me would be appreciated!

A quick look for papers on the topic indicates that oscilloscopes and a signal generator have been used to make such measurements, and there are good descriptions of the technique. However, it will obviously depend on the nature of the samples being measured. If you can borrow some equipment, you should be able to determine if this method will work for you.
Oscilloscopes are digital these days, the cheap ones are eight bit, with sensitivities down to some millivolts, and time bases down to 100Sec/division. Provided you have a good signal to noise ratio, phase measurements are trivial. It is possible that the resolution and sensitivity may be insufficient without resorting to a twelve bit scope, or at very least a preamplifier ahead of an eight bit scope.
If your signal levels are very low, and/or the phase shifts are small, then there are analogue methods for processing signals that may be necessary, for example, lock in amplifiers.
If you have a large number of measurements to make, then you may have to resort to an automated method using a PC, most test gear these days can be run from PCs over USB/ethernet, and are programmed using scripting languages (sometimes proprietary), Python is also used.
It is always a good idea to have a means of calibrating your set up, is there such a standardised method used by geophysicists?
Without knowing more I would hesitate to make further comment.
Cheers,
Richard

Not much I can add to Richard's answer apart from recommending the use of Labview. I have some basic experience with Labview and it is incredibly versatile. Where basic test equipment (oscilloscopes, meters, data loggers) will get you basic data for later analysis, Labview can, in the hands of someone who knows what they are doing, process the data and present it in a more usable form for you. It sounds like you will not be using very high frequencies so the hardware should not be expensive.

if you have some basic electronics and math knowledge and an idea of what you want out of these experiments you could probably set this up yourself. National Instruments have always been very helpful to me and would either give you advice and help or put you in touch with someone who will be able to help you directly.

Good luck with it // David

Thanks for feedback! I'm going to borrow some equipment so I'm going to try out the oscilloscope setup first. Starting out I'm thinking of only making 15-20 readings across the frequency range I mentioned above, hopefully it won't take too long. As I get more familiar with the equipment I do think I will try and automate the process. As far as calibrating the setup, I have seen some studies use a test circuit and others that have used a sample of water of known conductivity. Leaning towards using a sample of water as it seems simpler for someone like me.