I'm assuming that by "the usual $Y$ combinator" you mean Curry's fixed point combinator:
$$ Y = \lambda f . (\lambda x . f (x x)) (\lambda x. f(x x)) $$
The property $Y F \equiv_\beta F(Y F)$ can be proven as follows:
$$\begin{aligned}
YF &\equiv_\beta^\star (\lambda x . F (x x)) (\lambda x. F(x x)) & (1)\\
&\equiv_\beta^\star F ((\lambda x . F (x x)) (\lambda x. F(x x)))& (2)\\
&\equiv F(YF)& (3)
\end{aligned}$$
Where $\equiv_\beta^\star$ is the transitive and reflexive closure of the beta-reduction.
The $Y$ combinator is applied to $F$
The recursion happens; the first $(\lambda x. F(x x))$ is applied to the second, obtaining exactly the expression from (1), but "wrapped" inside an $F$.
Since what we had before was equivalent to $YF$, the result is $F(YF)$.
I'm assuming that by "the usual $Y$ combinator" you mean Curry's fixed point combinator:
$$ Y = \lambda f . (\lambda x . f (x x)) (\lambda x. f(x x)) $$
The property $Y F \equiv_\beta F(Y F)$ can be proven as follows:
$$\begin{aligned} YF &\equiv_\beta^\star (\lambda x . F (x x)) (\lambda x. F(x x)) & (1)\\ &\equiv_\beta^\star F ((\lambda x . F (x x)) (\lambda x. F(x x)))& (2)\\ &\equiv F(YF)& (3) \end{aligned}$$
Where $\equiv_\beta^\star$ is the transitive and reflexive closure of the beta-reduction.